CustodyStress
Archive › Device loss
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01359

A 2025 device loss case involved a Ledger Nano X that was left behind in a hotel room.

Survives
Case description
A 2025 device loss case involved a Ledger Nano X that was left behind in a hotel room. The holder's seed phrase was documented at home. The holder contacted the hotel, which confirmed the device had been found and held in lost property. However, concerned that hotel staff might attempt to access the device, the holder immediately sent a small test transaction to a new address and monitored whether the funds at the hotel device's address moved. They did not—confirming the device had not been accessed. The holder recovered the device from the hotel within 48 hours and transferred all funds to a new wallet as a precaution.
Custody context
Stress conditionDevice loss
Custody systemHardware wallet (single key)
OutcomeSurvives
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2025
CountryUnited States
Outcome interpretation
Access remained possible under the reported conditions.
Source
Privately Reported
Evidence type
News article
Related cases involving device loss
188 cases involve device loss 274 cases involve hardware wallet (single key) View archive statistics →
This archive documents observed custody survivability failures. It does not attempt to document all Bitcoin losses or security incidents. Submit a case
← All cases
Framework references
Terms guide
Survives
Access remained possible under the reported conditions.
Constrained
Access remained possible, but only with delay, dependence, or significant difficulty.
Blocked
Access was not possible under the reported conditions.
Indeterminate
There was not enough information to determine the outcome.
Single-person knowledge
Recovery depended on information or capability held by one individual who was unavailable.
Institutional dependence
Recovery depended on a third-party institution or service that was inaccessible or uncooperative.
Documentation gap
Recovery depended on instructions that were missing, incomplete, or unclear.
Authority mismatch
The person with legal authority to act did not have operational access, or vice versa.
Original text
Rate this translation
Your feedback will be used to help improve Google Translate