Harvey AI unveils Firm Knowledge, an enterprise search platform connecting legal teams with institutional data across documents, emails, and CLM systems.
Harvey AI has rolled out Firm Knowledge, a new enterprise search feature designed to help legal teams locate and leverage institutional data scattered across document management systems, emails, and contract lifecycle management tools.
The platform addresses a persistent headache in legal operations: valuable expertise trapped in fragmented systems where finding the right precedent or past negotiation can eat hours of billable time.
What It Actually Does
Firm Knowledge lets users run natural language queries across connected company resources. Ask something like “show all indemnity provisions from relevant deals in the last 24 months and any related communications,” and Harvey surfaces structured results with summaries rather than a raw document dump.
The system maintains permission-aware architecture, meaning associates only see what they’re authorized to access. Ethical walls stay intact across matters—a critical requirement for firms handling competing clients.
Three integration paths are available: native connections to existing file storage, API access for programmatic data feeds, and upcoming Model Context Protocol support slated for later this year.
Practical Applications
Harvey positions the tool around three use cases. For due diligence, teams can pull information from multiple sources without manually reviewing each document. New associates can query matter history to get up to speed faster. And firms looking to productize their expertise can embed Harvey’s capabilities into client-facing tools for higher-volume, lower-margin work.
That last point hints at where legal AI is heading—not just internal efficiency gains, but new revenue models built on structured proprietary knowledge.
The Bigger Picture
Knowledge management has long been the unsexy cousin of legal tech. Most firms know their institutional knowledge represents a strategic asset, but actually making it discoverable has proven difficult. The knowledge-based theory of the firm treats such expertise as both valuable and scarce—which means tools that unlock it carry real competitive implications.
Harvey’s approach tackles the distinction between tacit knowledge (the stuff partners carry in their heads) and explicit knowledge (what’s actually written down). By connecting communications to artifacts to final agreements, the platform attempts to capture context that pure document search misses.
Existing Harvey customers can contact their account teams for access details. The company is also accepting demo requests from prospective clients.
AAVE price prediction shows mixed signals with analysts targeting $190-195 by February 2026, while current technical indicators suggest caution at $155 support levels.
Recent analyst sentiment remains optimistic for AAVE despite current price weakness. Felix Pinkston noted on January 16 that “AAVE shows bullish potential toward $190-195 range by February 2026, with current price at $173.76 offering entry opportunity despite neutral RSI and bearish MACD momentum.”
Peter Zhang provided a detailed AAVE price prediction on January 17, stating: “AAVE Price Prediction Summary: Short-term target (1 week): $182-184; Medium-term forecast (1 month): $190-195 range; Bullish breakout level: $184.75; Critical support: $164.51.”
Rebeca Moen’s analysis from January 15 reinforced this bullish Aave forecast: “AAVE price prediction shows bullish momentum toward $190-195 by February despite mixed signals. Technical analysis reveals key resistance at $184 with strong support holding.”
The consensus among these analysts points toward a potential 20-25% upside from current levels, though they acknowledge the challenging near-term technical environment.
AAVE Technical Analysis Breakdown
Current technical indicators present a mixed picture for AAVE. Trading at $155.21, the token sits near critical support levels with several bearish signals dominating the short-term outlook.
The RSI reading of 40.78 indicates neutral momentum, neither oversold nor overbought conditions. However, the MACD histogram at 0.0000 suggests bearish momentum has stalled, potentially setting up for a reversal if buying pressure emerges.
AAVE’s position within the Bollinger Bands is particularly telling. With a %B position of 0.024, the token trades extremely close to the lower band at $154.58, indicating potential oversold conditions. The middle band at $167.70 represents the 20-day moving average and serves as immediate resistance.
All major moving averages trade above the current price, creating a bearish technical structure. The SMA 7 at $166.03, SMA 20 at $167.70, and SMA 50 at $171.79 all act as resistance levels that AAVE must reclaim for bullish momentum.
The Stochastic oscillator shows deeply oversold readings with %K at 12.18 and %D at 9.75, suggesting a potential bounce may be due from current levels.
Aave Price Targets: Bull vs Bear Case
Bullish Scenario
The bullish case for AAVE centers on reclaiming the $164.55 strong resistance level, which coincides with analyst predictions of a breakout above this zone. Should this level break, the next targets align with the $180.81 upper Bollinger Band and the analyst consensus range of $190-195.
Technical confirmation would require a decisive break above $164.55 with volume, followed by a successful retest of this level as support. The RSI would need to push above 50 to confirm bullish momentum, while a MACD crossover above the signal line would provide additional confirmation.
In this scenario, the February target of $190-195 represents approximately 22-25% upside potential from current levels, making it an attractive risk-reward proposition for bulls.
Bearish Scenario
The bearish case focuses on the failure to hold current support levels around $147.05. A breakdown below this critical support could trigger additional selling pressure, potentially targeting the psychological $140 level or lower.
Risk factors include the bearish MACD momentum, all moving averages trading above price, and the overall cryptocurrency market volatility. Additionally, any broader market weakness could amplify AAVE’s downside risk.
A break below $147.05 would invalidate the near-term bullish thesis and could lead to a test of deeper support levels around $130-135.
Should You Buy AAVE? Entry Strategy
Based on current technical levels, a layered entry approach appears most prudent. Conservative buyers might wait for a clear break above $164.55 resistance with confirmation before entering positions.
More aggressive traders could consider accumulating in the $147.05-$155.21 range, using the strong support level as a natural stop-loss placement. This strategy offers favorable risk-reward dynamics if the analyst targets prove accurate.
For risk management, stop-losses should be placed below $147.05, representing approximately 5-6% downside from current levels. Target profits could be taken in stages, with partial profits at $175-180 and remaining positions held for the $190-195 target range.
Position sizing should remain conservative given the mixed technical signals and overall market uncertainty.
Conclusion
The AAVE price prediction presents an intriguing setup with analyst targets suggesting significant upside potential over the coming month. While current technical indicators show bearish momentum, oversold conditions and analyst optimism support the case for a potential reversal.
The $190-195 February target represents realistic upside based on technical resistance levels and historical price action. However, traders should remain cautious of the immediate bearish signals and use proper risk management.
Disclaimer: Cryptocurrency price predictions are inherently speculative and should not be considered financial advice. Always conduct your own research and consider your risk tolerance before making investment decisions.
Bitcoin is attempting to find support near the $88,000 level, signaling a positive sentiment.
Buyers will have to defend the support levels in select major altcoins, or the recovery may fizzle out.
Bitcoin (BTC) is attempting to find support near $88,000, but a handful of US and global macroeconomic factors are creating headwinds for the entire crypto market. As a result, the buyers are taking a cautious approach and possibly waiting to see how a reignited trade war between the United States and the European Union will impact markets.
The big question on traders’ minds is how low BTC price may fall. Veteran trader Peter Brandt said in a post on X that BTC may plunge to $58,000 to $62,000, but he added that he is wrong 50% of the time and would not be ashamed if the price did not go there.
Crypto market data daily view. Source: TradingView
Fundstrat head of research Tom Lee also cautioned investors to be ready for a “painful decline” across the stock and crypto markets in 2026. However, a minor positive is that Lee expects a strong finish to the year, with BTC possibly making a new all-time high.
Could buyers arrest the decline in BTC and the major altcoins? Let’s analyze the charts of the top 10 cryptocurrencies to find out.
Bitcoin price prediction
Buyers tried to start a recovery in BTC on Wednesday, but the bears held their ground, indicating selling on rallies.
The 20-day exponential moving average (EMA) ($91,786) is sloping down, and the relative strength index (RSI) is in negative territory, indicating that bears have a slight edge. If the $86,500 support gives way, the BTC/USDT pair may decline to $84,000.
The moving averages are expected to behave as a resistance during any relief rallies, but if the bulls prevail, the Bitcoin price may rally to $94,789 and then to $97,924. A close above $97,924 signals a potential trend change. The pair may then soar to $100,000 and subsequently to $107,500.
Ether price prediction
Ether (ETH) nosedived below the moving averages on Tuesday and reached the support line of the symmetrical triangle pattern.
The bulls are attempting to defend the support line, but the weak bounce suggests that the bears have kept up the pressure. If the price breaks below the support line, the ETH/USDT pair may decline to $2,623.
Time is running out for the bulls. They will have to swiftly push the Ether price above the moving averages to get back in the game. The upside momentum is likely to pick up after buyers achieve a close above the resistance line.
BNB price prediction
BNB’s (BNB) pullback dipped below the 50-day simple moving average (SMA) ($885) on Wednesday, indicating that the market has rejected the breakout above $928.
The BNB price may slide to the uptrend line, where the bulls are expected to step in. The rebound off the uptrend line may face selling at the moving averages. If the price turns down from the moving averages, the BNB/USDT pair may sink below the uptrend line. The pair may then test the $790 support.
Buyers will have to thrust the price above the $959 level to seize control. If they manage to do that, the pair may skyrocket to $1,087.
XRP price prediction
XRP (XRP) remains pinned below the moving averages, indicating that the bears continue to exert pressure.
The bears will attempt to pull the XRP price to $1.77 and then to the crucial support at $1.61. Buyers are expected to fiercely defend the zone between the $1.61 level and the support line of the descending channel pattern. If the price turns up sharply from the support zone, it suggests that the pair may remain inside the channel for a while longer.
Buyers will have to push the price above the downtrend line to gain the upper hand. The pair may then rally toward $2.70.
Solana price prediction
Solana’s (SOL) break below the 50-day SMA ($132) suggests that the price may remain inside the $117 to $147 range for a few more days.
The $117 level is the crucial support to watch out for on the downside, as a break below it may signal the resumption of the downtrend. The SOL/USDT pair may then plummet toward $95.
Contrarily, a break and close above $147 signals that the bulls have overpowered the bears. That suggests a potential trend change, propelling the Solana price toward $172 and then $189.
Dogecoin price prediction
Dogecoin (DOGE) has reached the $0.12 support, which is expected to attract solid buying by the bulls.
The relief rally is likely to face selling at the 20-day EMA ($0.13). If the price turns down sharply from the 20-day EMA, the risk of a break below the $0.12 support increases. The DOGE/USDT pair may then retest the Oct. 10 low of $0.10.
Contrary to this assumption, a break above the moving averages suggests that the Dogecoin price may remain inside the $0.12 to $0.16 range for some more time. The advantage will tilt in favor of the bulls on a close above the $0.16 resistance.
Cardano price prediction
Cardano (ADA) is attempting to take support near the $0.33 level, but the recovery is expected to face selling in the zone between the moving averages and the downtrend line.
If the Cardano price turns down sharply from the overhead resistance, the possibility of a break below the $0.33 level increases. The ADA/USDT pair may then slump to the support line of the descending channel pattern. Buyers are expected to fiercely defend the support line, which is close to the Oct. 10 low of $0.27.
This negative view will be invalidated in the near term if the price turns up and breaks above the downtrend line. The pair may then ascend to the breakdown level of $0.50.
The recovery is expected to face selling at the 20-day EMA ($602). If the price turns down sharply from the 20-day EMA, it increases the risk of a break below the $563 support. The BCH/USDT pair may then descend to $518.
Alternatively, a break above the moving averages suggests that the bulls are attempting a comeback. The Bitcoin Cash price may climb to the $631 level, which is expected to pose a strong challenge.
Monero price prediction
Monero’s (XMR) bounce off the 20-day EMA ($541) on Monday fizzled out at $650, indicating selling on rallies.
The Monero price turned down sharply on Tuesday and closed below the 20-day EMA. That suggests the XMR/USDT pair may have topped out in the near term. The pair may complete a 100% retracement and plunge to $417.
Buyers have an uphill task ahead of them. The relief rally is expected to face selling at the 20-day EMA and then at the $650 level. A close above the $650 level signals that the bulls are back in the game.
Chainlink price prediction
Chainlink (LINK) slipped below the moving averages on Monday, signaling that the range-bound action may continue for some more time.
The flattish moving averages and the RSI near the 40 level do not give a clear advantage either to the bulls or the bears. A break below the $11.61 to $10.94 support zone will tilt the advantage in favor of the bears. The LINK/USDT pair may then drop toward the Oct. 10 low of $7.90.
Buyers will have to drive the Chainlink price above the $14.98 level to signal strength. The pair may then rally toward $17.66.
This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision. While we strive to provide accurate and timely information, Cointelegraph does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information in this article. This article may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. Cointelegraph will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from your reliance on this information.
Financial privacy is becoming the next structural battle in crypto, and neither governments nor the technology are fully prepared for mass digital surveillance or large-scale privacy.
Institutional adoption of cryptocurrencies is accelerating, as more banks and payments companies test blockchain for settlements, but the technology itself exposes transaction data to the public.
“What people are not comfortable with is having their transactions broadcast to the entire world,” Yaya Fanusie, head of global policy at Aleo Network and a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) economic and counterterrorism analyst, told Cointelegraph.
“That is why, even though blockchain transparency is a feature and not a bug, it does not work for large-scale use without some form of privacy.”
Blockchain payments are publicly accessible by design, but governments are beginning to engage seriously with privacy technology like zero-knowledge (ZK) proofs to reconcile transparency with existing financial privacy norms.
The amount of Zcash held in shielded addresses has risen, reflecting growing use of privacy-preserving transactions. Source: ZecHub
ZK privacy faces a chicken-and-egg problem
For regulators and financial institutions, the privacy debate often revolves around how much confidentiality can be preserved from the public while still allowing compliance, supervision and enforcement.
Fanusie said that this framing mirrors the existing financial system, where transactions are not anonymous but are also not exposed to constant online scrutiny. That becomes harder to maintain on public blockchains, where transparency is built into the architecture.
Banks, payments companies and corporations may see efficiency and programmability benefits in blockchain systems, but few are willing to conduct routine financial activity on public ledgers where competitors, counterparties or adversaries can infer sensitive business information.
“If all of those actions are public, it creates security risks and confidentiality issues. Institutions have proprietary and sensitive information that cannot be exposed, and they cannot operate at scale if every transaction is visible to everyone,” Fanusie said.
Privacy-preserving technologies like zero-knowledge (ZK) proofs have emerged as a potential compromise. ZK systems allow verification without revealing underlying data, such as identity or transaction details.
While often cited in public discussions among crypto developers and privacy advocates, ZK tech remains largely absent from major use cases such as KYC verification at major exchanges.
ZK technology is often cited as a solution to blockchain privacy challenges, but real-world adoption has lagged its promise. Source: Mert Mumtaz
According to Fanusie, regulators are no longer dismissive of ZK technology, and many have been briefed extensively on how these systems work. However, there is hesitation about the practicality of the technology. Supervisors want to see how privacy tools perform under real-world conditions, particularly at scale, before accepting them as substitutes for existing compliance mechanisms.
“Regulators are intrigued by these tools and want to see them in action,” Fanusie said. “But it becomes a chicken-and-egg problem because the industry needs regulatory clarity to deploy them.”
CBDCs and the surveillance trade-off
Central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) combine state authority with direct access to transaction data. Unlike private sector payment systems or blockchains, governments are at the center of digital money flows.
Fanusie argued that it’s important to separate wholesale and retail CBDCs in the privacy debate.
Wholesale systems, typically restricted to banks and financial institutions, resemble existing settlement infrastructure and raise fewer public privacy concerns. Scrutiny tends to focus on retail CBDCs, where transaction data tied to individuals and businesses could be monitored, aggregated or used beyond compliance needs.
At least 137 economies have explored CBDCs. Source: Atlantic Council
Europe’s and China’s approaches are often studied as two of the world’s most important economies actively pursuing CBDC developments.
“The challenge, from the perspective of someone who has reviewed these proposals, is that the privacy implications cannot simply be addressed by saying it will be private,” Fanusie said.
Even with privacy-preserving techniques, Fanusie added, unanswered questions remain about who ultimately controls access to transaction records, how exceptions are handled and whether safeguards can withstand future political pressure.
In that sense, CBDCs aren’t just a new payment rail but a test of how much financial data states are willing to collect and retain in the digital age.
Acceptable privacy isn’t always absolute privacy
Financial privacy is often discussed in absolute terms. Still, Fanusie argued that privacy isn’t just secrecy but extends to control over who can see transaction data.
Even general retail users are comfortable with a system where transactions are fenced from public view, though it’s available to intermediaries and law enforcement.
Public blockchains expose transaction data beyond what users and institutions are accustomed to, while centralized digital systems, like CBDCs, raise concerns about how much access is concentrated and how it might be used over time.
Growing privacy concerns around CBDCs have coincided with increased attention to privacy-preserving technologies. Source: John Foss
“People accept that someone can see their transactions but not that everyone can,” Fanusie said.
“When you’re talking about something that operates across an entire economy, privacy becomes much more complicated.”
That doesn’t mean that public ledgers have no place in the future of finance. Blockchain’s transparency has delivered tangible benefits — such as auditability and enforcement — and remains central to many crypto use cases.
Privacy-preserving tools like ZK-proofs could help reconcile blockchain transparency with existing privacy norms, but adoption is stalled by a chicken-and-egg problem between regulators and industry.
But early movers are pushing ahead. Projects, including Aztec, the Ethereum Foundation and Fanusie’s Aleo, have promoted ZK systems as a way to enable selective disclosure rather than fully masking transactions.
Policy-focused groups are also engaging regulators on their use. The International Association for Trusted Blockchain Applications has argued that ZK-proofs could help blockchain projects comply with the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, and the bloc has studied the technology for the European Digital Identity Wallet.
Cointelegraph Features and Cointelegraph Magazine publish long-form journalism, analysis and narrative reporting produced by Cointelegraph’s in-house editorial team and selected external contributors with subject-matter expertise. All articles are edited and reviewed by Cointelegraph editors in line with our editorial standards. Contributions from external writers are commissioned for their experience, research or perspective and do not reflect the views of Cointelegraph as a company unless explicitly stated. Content published in Features and Magazine does not constitute financial, legal or investment advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult qualified professionals where appropriate. Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. The selection, commissioning and publication of Features and Magazine content are not influenced by advertisers, partners or commercial relationships.
Commercial bank money is likely to become fully digital in the future, alongside central bank money, according to Fabio Panetta, the governor of Italy’s central bank, Banca d’Italia.
Panetta made the remarks on Wednesday while addressing the executive committee of Italy’s banking association. According to a report by Reuters, Panetta said both digital commercial bank money and central bank money would continue to anchor the monetary system, while stablecoins would only play a complementary role.
He added that the stability of stablecoins ultimately depends on their peg to traditional currencies, limiting their ability to function independently in the financial system. Panetta’s comments came during a broader discussion on payments, financial infrastructure and geopolitical uncertainty.
The remarks reflect how European policymakers have described the digitalization of money as a long-term structural trend led by banks and central institutions, rather than privately issued crypto assets.
Payments and digital finance become strategic as geopolitics reshape markets
In the same speech, Panetta said payments have become a strategic area for banks, describing them as a core competitive battleground as technology and politics reshape the global economy.
According to the Italian wire service ANSA, Panetta said traditional economic variables like investment, trade and interest rates are now increasingly influenced by political decisions rather than purely market forces.
The central banker also said the center of gravity of the global economy is being driven largely by technological power. This tech transformation, he said, is occurring in a less cooperative global environment than past industrial revolutions.
Panetta framed digital finance as a pressure point for banks operating in an increasingly fragmented geopolitical landscape.
Panetta’s comments reflect the central bank’s cautious approach to stablecoins and privately issued digital money.
On Sept. 19, 2025, Bank of Italy Vice Director Chiara Scotti warned that so-called multi-issuance stablecoins, tokens issued across multiple jurisdictions under a single brand, could pose significant legal, operational and financial stability risks to the European Union.
At the time, Scotti said such stablecoins should be restricted to jurisdictions with equivalent regulatory standards and be subjected to strict reserve and redemption mandates. She cited concerns that cross-border issuance could undermine EU oversight frameworks.
She also acknowledged that stablecoins may lower transaction costs and improve payment efficiency.
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently. Read our Editorial Policy https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy
The long-running tension between central banks and Bitcoin resurfaced at the World Economic Forum in Davos, where senior executives and policymakers debated regulation versus innovation in digital finance.
Trust in money must come from regulated public institutions rather than private crypto issuers, French central bank Governor François Villeroy de Galhau said during a panel titled “Is Tokenization the Future?” on Wednesday.
“The guarantee for trust is independence on the central bank side,” Galhau said, adding: “I trust more independent central banks with a democratic mandate than private issuers of Bitcoin.”
His remarks sparked a sharp exchange, with Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong clapping back by arguing that trust should ultimately be determined by users, not institutions.
Armstrong backs “healthy competition” between Bitcoin and central banks
Responding to Galhau’s argument, Armstrong said Bitcoin is a decentralized protocol with no issuer, contrasting it with central banks’ institutional independence.
“In the sense that central banks have independence, Bitcoin is even more independent,” Armstrong said, adding: “There’s no country or company or individual who controls it in the world.”
From left, CNBC anchor Karen Tso, François Villeroy de Galhau, Bill Winters, Valérie Urbain, Brian Armstrong and Brad Garlinghouse during a panel in Davos. Source: WEF
Armstrong said Bitcoin and central banks should compete rather than replace one another, a remark that drew a chuckle from Galhau:
“I think it’s a healthy competition because if people can decide which one they trust more, I think it’s actually the greatest accountability mechanism on deficit spending.”
Even though Galhau said he trusted central banks more than “private issuers of Bitcoin,” Galhau did not reject private involvement in money.
“Money has existed for centuries as a public-private partnership,” he said, suggesting tokenization could play a role if it operates within a regulated framework.
“Regulation is not the enemy of innovation. On the contrary, it is a guarantee of trust,” he added.
The governor also sought to reassure banks that the EU’s central bank digital currency, the digital euro, is not intended to displace private financial institutions, saying the goal is to modernize payments while preserving monetary sovereignty.
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently. Read our Editorial Policy https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy
Several chartists warn that Bitcoin could decline toward $30,000 in February as the price action mirrors previous four-year cycles.
Bitcoin’s (BTC) 30% drawdown from all-time highs did little to deter large investors, who continued to increase their holdings throughout January.
Key takeaways:
Large holders are buying the dip, signaling long-term confidence.
Chartists warn that a bull trap could still drive BTC sharply lower.
Bitcoin sharks are buying the dips
As of Wednesday, so-called “sharks,” which represent entities holding 100-1,000 BTC, were accumulating Bitcoin at their fastest pace since 2013, data from Glassnode showed.
BTC shark net position change (30-day average). Source: Glassnode
These entities, which typically include early adopters and institutional trading desks, accumulated Bitcoin despite the latest correction to around $87,900 from nearly $98,000.
As a result, the accumulation suggested that large investors view the ongoing BTC pullback as a buying opportunity, signaling confidence in its longer-term bullish outlook.
Historically, similar spikes in shark accumulation preceded strong rallies, including a roughly 160% price gain within a year and the mid-2024 move that saw BTC climb from around $54,000 to over $116,000.
BTC will crash to $35,000 in February, analyst warns
Chartists tracking Bitcoin’s four-year cycle warned that the multi-month slump will continue in the coming weeks.
For instance, analyst Lofty said BTC price can dump to $35,000 in February, citing a “perfect bull trap” after Bitcoin failed to hold above its rising channel’s upper boundary, as shown below.
BTC/USDT chart comparing 2021 and 2026 trends. Source: TradingView/Lofty
He compared the structure to Bitcoin’s 2021 double top, where successive breakout attempts trapped late buyers before a sharp, multi-month sell-off followed.
Bitwise also predicted 2026 to be an “up year” for Bitcoin.
This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision. While we strive to provide accurate and timely information, Cointelegraph does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information in this article. This article may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. Cointelegraph will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from your reliance on this information.
A breach at a commerce partner can expose customer order data even if wallet systems remain secure.
Real order context, such as product, price and contact or shipping details, can make phishing attempts appear legitimate and harder to detect.
Treat inbound “support” messages as untrusted until they are verified through official Ledger resources.
In early January 2026, some Ledger customers were notified that personal and order information related to Ledger.com purchases had been accessed during a security incident involving Global-e, a third-party e-commerce partner that acts as the “merchant of record” for certain orders.
Ledger stressed that its own hardware and software systems were not breached. However, the exposed purchase data was enough to spark a familiar second act: highly targeted phishing attempts that appear legitimate because they reference real-world details.
This article explains why breaches at vendors outside a wallet company can still put users at risk, which types of leaked data make impersonation scams more convincing and how to evaluate “support” messages using principles Ledger repeatedly highlights in its scam advisories.
The Global-e incident, explained
Ledger’s warning in January 2026 concerned a security incident at Global-e, a third-party e-commerce partner used by many brands that can act as the “merchant of record” for certain Ledger.com purchases.
In practical terms, Global-e sits within the checkout and fulfillment chain and holds the customer and order information required to process and ship physical products.
According to Ledger’s customer notice and multiple reports, unauthorized access occurred within Global-e’s information systems. The data involved related to customers who made purchases through this Global-e checkout flow.
The exposure was described as order-related information, the kind of data that can include contact and shipping identifiers, along with purchase metadata, such as what was ordered.
Ledger emphasized that the incident was separate from its devices and self-custody infrastructure. As a result, it did not expose private keys, recovery phrases or account balances.
Did you know? When attackers obtain verified order data, they can craft phishing messages that feel authentic enough to bypass a user’s initial skepticism.
What leaked data is most useful to phishers and why
When people hear “data breach,” they often think first about passwords or payment cards. In this incident, the more relevant risk was context, enough real-world detail to make an impersonation message feel as though it was clearly meant for you.
Ledger’s notice about the Global-e incident, along with incident reporting, described exposure limited to basic personal and contact information and order details tied to Ledger.com purchases processed through Global-e. This included data such as what was purchased and pricing information.
This helps scammers address two common social-engineering challenges in social engineering:
1) Credibility: A message that includes your name and references a real order (“your Nano order,” “your purchase price” or “your order details”) can feel like a legitimate follow-up from a merchant or support team, even if it originates from a criminal. Reports on the incident indicate that the exposed data could include exactly these kinds of “proof points.”
2) Relevance: Order metadata gives attackers a believable pretext to make contact, such as delivery issues, “account verification,” “security updates” or “urgent action required.” Ledger’s ongoing phishing guidance emphasizes that the goal of these narratives is typically to push victims toward high-risk actions, such as revealing a recovery phrase or interacting with a fake support flow.
The phishing line in Ledger-themed scams
Ledger’s scam advisories describe a consistent set of patterns. Messages impersonate Ledger or a delivery or payment partner and attempt to create urgency around a “security issue,” “account notice” or “required verification,” then funnel the recipient toward a step that puts recovery credentials at risk.
The most common warning signs are behavioral rather than technical. The message claims something time-sensitive, such as a wallet being “at risk,” an order being “blocked” or a “firmware update” being required. It then pushes the recipient to click to a page or form and attempts to extract the 24-word secret recovery phrase.
Ledger will never ask for that phrase, and it should never be entered anywhere other than directly on the device.
These campaigns also tend to spread across multiple channels, including email, SMS and sometimes phone calls or physical mail, and they may appear more convincing when attackers can reference real purchase context drawn from leaked order data.
To reduce uncertainty, Ledger maintains guidance on common scam types and explains how to validate legitimate communications through its official channels.
Did you know? The 2026 Global-e compromise was not the only time Ledger buyer data was exposed. After a July 2020 breach of Ledger’s e-commerce and marketing database, a data set later published in December 2020 reportedly included more than 1 million email addresses and roughly 272,000 records containing names, physical addresses and phone numbers.
Practical defenses to bear in mind
When phishing follows a data leak, it typically asks you to volunteer something sensitive, usually your recovery phrase or to approve an action you did not initiate.
That is why Ledger’s guidance remains consistent across its scam advisories: Your 24-word recovery phrase should never be shared and should never be entered into a website, form or app prompt, even if the message appears official.
A simple way to reduce risk is to evaluate messages using a clear process:
Treat any “urgent security” message as untrusted by default, especially if it asks you to click through to “verify,” “restore” or “secure” something.
If the message references real order details such as product, price or shipping, remember that this can be exactly what leaked third-party commerce data enables. It is not proof of legitimacy.
When in doubt, do not continue the conversation thread. Use Ledger’s official resources to cross-check current scam patterns and confirm legitimate communication channels.
Stick to a few rules that do not change, even when the story in the email does. This is general educational information, not personalized security advice.
What the Global-e incident teaches about phishing risk
The Global-e incident is a reminder that self-custody can remain technically intact while users still face real risk through the commerce layer.
A checkout partner, shipping workflow or customer support stack may legitimately hold names, contact details and order metadata. Once that kind of data set is exposed, however, it can be repurposed into convincing impersonation attempts almost immediately.
That is why the most durable protection is sticking to a few rules that do not change: Treat inbound “support” outreach as untrusted by default, validate communication channels through official resources, and never reveal or enter your 24-word recovery phrase anywhere except directly on the device itself.
Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. The selection, commissioning and publication of Features and Magazine content are not influenced by advertisers, partners or commercial relationships.
