Users Claim Ledger Has Abandoned Self-Custody Values by Introducing a Paywall
- Ledger introduces paid multisig transactions via Gen5 hardware wallet, sparking backlash over $10 fees and 0.05% token charges. - Critics accuse company of abandoning self-custody principles, citing closed-source systems and exclusion of older Nano S devices. - Users call fees "profit-driven," while competitors like Trezor and open-source signers gain traction in fragmented crypto market. - Ledger defends enterprise-focused model but faces criticism for imposing paywalls on retail users' core security fe
Ledger, a prominent provider of cryptocurrency hardware wallets, has stirred debate with its introduction of a built-in multisig feature that imposes per-transaction charges. Developers and veteran users have labeled this approach a "cash cow" strategy. Launched together with the Ledger Nano Gen5 hardware wallet, the feature is intended to simplify multi-signature transactions by leveraging Ledger’s backend, but its fee structure has attracted significant criticism.
With a retail price of $179, the Ledger Nano Gen5 features an e-ink display, secure transaction signing, and NFC-enabled tap-to-unlock. It also works with the $179 Ledger Security Key, a physical card that eliminates the need for seed phrases to access wallets. The device offers customizable badges designed by Susan Kare, the artist behind the original Apple Macintosh icons. Despite these innovations, the new multisig system has drawn attention away from the hardware, as users express concerns over the service’s cost.
According to the updated pricing, each standard transaction now carries a $10 fee, while ERC-20 token transfers incur a 0.05% charge on top of network gas fees. Security expert "pcaversaccio," a key member of the SEAL-911 crypto-security network, criticized Ledger for putting profits before user confidence, stating on social media that the fee model goes against the company's "cypherpunk roots." Avalanche Team1 developer "Sarnavo" also pointed out that Ledger’s closed-source coordination and lack of transparency in transaction processing further erode trust.
Additional criticism has focused on the fact that Ledger’s older Nano S models are not compatible with the new multisig feature. The Nano S, still used by millions, does not have sufficient memory for clear signing or the updated backend. Long-term customers have called this exclusion unfair, with pcaversaccio arguing that Nano S users are "essentially censored" by the new requirements. This decision has led to discontent among users who previously saw Ledger as a strong advocate for self-custody.
CoinDesk.>Ledger has responded by highlighting its focus on institutional clients, noting that Ledger Enterprise Multisig is tailored for hedge funds, DAOs, and traditional finance organizations. The platform enables teams to jointly authorize transactions using separate Ledger devices, providing "Clear Signed" confirmations directly on hardware. Nonetheless, critics maintain that these enterprise-grade features do not warrant the added costs for individual users, who now encounter paywalls for essential security functions.
This controversy emerges as Ledger faces mounting competition from companies like Trezor, which has recently introduced the Safe 7, a quantum-resistant wallet built on open-source hardware. At the same time, mobile-focused signers such as Solana’s Seeker and Ethereum’s dgen1 are targeting users who prefer on-the-go solutions, further diversifying the market. Ledger representatives have not yet commented on the fee policy or addressed user feedback.
The dispute highlights a larger challenge in the cryptocurrency sector: balancing security, user experience, and profitability. While Ledger’s enterprise offerings may attract institutional partners, the new fee structure could drive away individual customers who value open-source solutions and reasonable pricing. As the industry continues to change, Ledger’s success will depend on its ability to innovate while maintaining the trust of its user community.
Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.
You may also like
Bitcoin, Ethereum now operate in ‘different monetary’ universes: Data

XRP News Today: Investors Consider XRP ETF Prospects Versus Presale Options
- XRP consolidates between $2.39-$2.41 in late 2025 amid mixed market sentiment, with analysts debating its breakout potential and $1.90 support level significance. - Pending XRP ETF approvals could inject $3-8B in capital, pushing price toward $2.50-$2.80 if SEC clears Bitwise, Franklin Templeton, and 21Shares applications. - XRP defies broader crypto outflows with $28M weekly inflows and $2.4B AUM, contrasting Bitcoin/Ethereum's $1.37B combined outflows despite subdued open interest at $3.36B. - Presale

Bitcoin News Update: Crypto Takes a New Turn as DeFi's Core Strengths Surpass the Hype-Fueled Phase
- Crypto market shifts focus to DeFi fundamentals as altcoins like Plug Power , Hyperion, and Mutuum show strong financial growth and innovation. - Plug Power reports $177M Q3 revenue and $370M funding, targeting EBITDAS-positive results by mid-2026 despite $363.5M net loss. - Hyperion DeFi achieves $6.6M net income via HYPE token treasury, leveraging Hyperliquid's 70ms block time for transparent trading and dApps. - Mutuum's $18.7M presale and 250% token price surge highlight DeFi lending growth, while Bi

ZEC Rises 5.93% in 24 Hours as Privacy Coins Experience a Surge
- Zcash (ZEC) surged 5.93% to $524.73 on Nov 13, 2025, despite a 10.98% weekly decline, driven by long-term gains of 32.18% monthly and 850.45% yearly. - Cypherpunk Technologies (formerly Leap Therapeutics) rebranded to focus on ZEC, purchasing 203,775 ZEC ($50M) or 1.25% of circulating supply, with Winklevoss Capital leading a $58.88M funding round. - The firm restructured leadership, appointing Khing Oei and Will McEvoy, and rebranded its ticker to CYPH , emphasizing ZEC’s privacy-centric zk-SNARKs techn