Global-e Breach Exposes Crypto Wallets via API Flaw; Microsoft Offers Copilot Uninstall Tool; UK Criminalizes AI Deepfakes; Nigeria Mandates Crypto-ID Linkage

TL;DR

• Global-e third-party breach compromises 50,000+ customer orders, exposing Ledger wallet data through compromised vendor system
• Microsoft enables enterprise admins to uninstall Copilot via documented Group Policy on Windows 11 Insider Preview
• UK moves to criminalize AI-generated sexual deepfakes and revokes X’s self-regulatory status amid growing public safety concerns
• Nigeria implements real-time crypto tracking via national IDs (NIN/TIN) to link blockchain transactions to tax records

Global-e Breach Exposes Ledger Wallet Data via Third-Party API Misconfiguration

Public Ledger wallet addresses, by design, are not secret. But when paired with email addresses, shipping details, and order timestamps from a compromised e-commerce SaaS platform, they become high-value targets for phishing campaigns. The Global-e breach exposed over 50,000 customer records, including wallet identifiers, enabling targeted social engineering attacks.

How Did the Attack Occur?

• Attacker gained access to Global-e’s third-party order-management API using a static API key.
• No mutual TLS, short-lived tokens, or least-privilege data controls were enforced.
• Data exfiltrated included: order ID, email, shipping address, and Ledger wallet references.
• Exfiltration completed in under 30 minutes; data appeared on dark-web marketplaces within hours.

What Data Was Compromised?

• Wallet address (public)
• Partial public-key hash
• Customer email
• Shipping address
• Order timestamps

Each element enables layered social engineering, credential stuffing, or time-based phishing.

What Are the Regulatory Implications?

• GDPR: Triggered by exposure of email and physical address as personal data.
• NIST SP 800-161: Requires improved supply-chain risk assessments for third-party APIs.
• SOC 2 / ISO 27001: Vendor security controls now under audit scrutiny.

What Actions Should Organizations Take?

• Enforce mutual TLS and short-lived OAuth tokens on all third-party APIs.
• Limit data returned to external systems to minimal fields (e.g., order ID only).
• Deploy outbound data-exfiltration monitoring for anomalies >500 MB/h.
• Mandate SOC 2 Type II audits in vendor contracts with right-to-audit clauses.
• Require affected users to rotate Ledger credentials and enable 2FA.

What Is the Broader Trend?

• 2026 is marked by supply-chain API abuse, with similar patterns seen in MOVEit, Okta, and Bybit breaches.
• Dark-web pricing for crypto-linked data is stabilizing at ~$0.03 per record.
• Regulators are increasingly treating wallet addresses linked to PII as sensitive personal data.
• Automated phishing kits now ingest leaked CSVs to generate personalized Ledger-style scams.

The breach did not compromise private keys. It compromised trust in the ecosystem. Public data, when contextualized, becomes exploitable. Organizations must treat third-party API integrations as attack surfaces—not convenience features.

Microsoft Introduces Official Group Policy to Uninstall Copilot on Windows 11 Enterprise

Microsoft has released a documented Group Policy, RemoveMicrosoftCopilotApp, in Windows 11 Insider Preview Build 26220.7535 (KB 5072046), enabling enterprise administrators to uninstall the Copilot application. The policy is available under User Configuration → Administrative Templates → Windows AI and requires three conditions: Copilot auto-start disabled, 28 days of inactivity, and an Enterprise, Pro, or Education SKU.

How does the removal process work?

The Group Policy executes Remove-AppxPackage on known Copilot AppX identifiers and adds CBS entries to prevent automatic reinstallation. It does not block manual reinstallation via the Microsoft Store. The policy is delivered as an optional update and can be enforced via WSUS, Intune, or SCCM.

What security benefits does this provide?

Removing Copilot reduces the device’s attack surface by eliminating background services tied to telemetry, cloud-linked Recall snapshot indexing, and potential token-based privilege escalation vectors. This aligns with GDPR and CCPA compliance by limiting personal data transmission to Microsoft cloud endpoints.

What risks accompany removal?

Community scripts such as "RemoveWindowsAI"—which delete Recall snapshots irreversibly—pose forensic and data-loss risks. While the official GPO avoids these pitfalls, administrators must ensure Recall data is backed up before deployment. The policy’s effectiveness depends on timely KB 5072046 deployment; delays leave systems vulnerable to issues seen in the March 2025 accidental removal incident.

How should enterprises implement this?

• Pilot the policy on ≤5% of devices to assess workflow impact.
• Integrate removal status into compliance dashboards (e.g., NIST 800-53 CM-7).
• Retain a rollback image for 30 days post-uninstall.
• Use AppLocker or WDAC to block reinstallation.
• Monitor telemetry endpoints (*.microsoft.com/ai) for traffic reduction.

What is the future trajectory?

Within three months, broader enterprise adoption is expected as GDPR-style audits increase. By 12 months, Microsoft may extend similar controls to other AI features (e.g., Recall, AI-enhanced Notepad) and potentially replace the consumer Copilot app with a tenant-managed, on-premises-respecting AI service for enterprise SKUs.

The introduction of this policy reflects Microsoft’s shift toward treating AI components as configurable enterprise services rather than mandatory OS features, balancing functionality with security and compliance.

UK Criminalizes AI Deepfakes and Revokes X’s Self-Regulatory Status Amid Rising Abuse

The UK has amended its Crime and Policing Bill to criminalize the creation and distribution of non-consensual intimate images generated by AI. This legal shift responds to documented misuse of X’s Grok AI model, which enabled users to generate nude images of individuals—including minors—via prompt injection. Between 2023 and 2025, over 12,000 daily prompts were used to produce such content, fueling image-based abuse and feeding dark-web markets where each image sold for $2,000–$5,000.

What actions did Ofcom take against X?

On 5 January 2026, Ofcom issued an urgent request for a technical risk assessment of Grok under the Online Safety Act (OSA) Section 5. By 9 January, a formal deadline was imposed for X to submit an Action-Taken Report detailing safeguards. Failure to comply triggers penalties of up to £18 million or 10% of global revenue. Concurrently, X’s self-regulatory status under OSA was revoked, removing its safe-harbour protections and mandating full Ofcom audits, real-time AI-output filtering, and audit-ready logging of all Grok requests.

How are other jurisdictions responding?

The European Commission initiated a Digital Services Act (DSA) investigation into Grok-generated CSAM in January 2026. ASEAN nations including Indonesia and Malaysia imposed temporary bans on Grok access. These actions reflect global regulatory alignment, with similar legislation anticipated in the U.S. and Australia. A potential UN-backed international treaty on AI-generated sexual abuse is projected for 2028.

What technical measures are now required?

Platforms must implement:

• Prompt-filtering at the inference layer to block terms like "undress" or "nude"
• OAuth 2.0 with multi-factor authentication for API access
• Real-time CSAM detection using PhotoDNA and AI classifiers
• Mandatory biometric age verification for image-generation requests
• Automated takedown pipelines meeting the 48-hour removal standard

A UK AI Abuse Information Sharing & Analysis Center (ISAC) is being established to coordinate threat intelligence across regulators and industry.

What is the financial and operational impact on X?

Revocation of self-regulation forces X to redesign its AI infrastructure for compliance. Failure to meet Ofcom’s requirements could result in a de facto ban in the UK. With X’s market capitalization at £18 billion, a 10% penalty could reach £1.8 billion. The company must now treat every AI-generated output as a potential incident, with forensic logging required for regulatory review.

What does the future hold?

By Q3 2026, Ofcom is expected to issue a final compliance order. In 2027, the EU may levy a €100 million fine under DSA. By 2028, international standards may mandate AI model watermarking, enabling source-level identification of synthetic media. The UK’s move signals a global pivot from voluntary moderation to enforceable legal accountability for generative AI systems.

Nigeria Links Crypto Transactions to National IDs: Tax Compliance vs. Cyber Risk

Nigeria’s National Tax Administration Act (NTAA) 2025 mandates that all Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) collect users’ National Identification Number (NIN) and Tax Identification Number (TIN) at onboarding. Transaction data must be reported to the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) within 24 hours and retained for seven years in encrypted form.

The regulation aligns Nigeria with the OECD’s Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF), enabling future cross-border tax data exchange. Every on-chain transaction involving a Nigerian VASP is now tied to a verified biometric identity and tax record, creating a centralized ledger of crypto activity.

What cyber risks does this centralized system introduce?

• Data breach exposure: France’s 2026 tax authority breach demonstrated that tax-linked crypto data is a high-value target for identity theft and ransomware.
• API abuse: India’s 2026 FIU KYC API exposure revealed credential-stuffing risks; Nigeria’s real-time reporting APIs face similar threats.
• Insider misuse: Nigeria’s December 2025 tax-agent data sale incident highlights internal access risks.
• Supply-chain vulnerabilities: Third-party reporting SDKs with unpatched CVEs could compromise VASP platforms.
• Cross-border privacy conflicts: Data sharing under CARF may violate Nigeria’s Data Protection Regulation (NDPR).

What mitigations are required?

What is the outlook?

Q2 2026: First large-scale breach of the tax archive is probable, likely ransomware. Q3 2026: FIU APIs will harden with mutual-TLS and rate limiting. Q4 2026: CARF data exchanges with EU partners begin, triggering NDPR compliance reviews. Q1 2027: Insider-threat detection systems will be deployed.

The system enhances tax enforcement but creates a high-value, single-point failure. Without immediate implementation of zero-trust architecture, encryption, and insider monitoring, the infrastructure risks becoming a cyberattack target of national consequence.