Samsung Super Fast Charger Recall in Denmark: Risk of Electric Shock Due to Poor Insulation
EU regulators have added a Samsung USB Type-C fast charger model “Super” to its database of hazardous electrical products, citing “insufficient insulation” that poses an electric shock risk, according to a European Commission safety notice dated 2026-06-15.
The Tech TL;DR:
- Samsung Super charger’s insulation failure could cause electric shocks during use
- CVE-2026-34567 identifies thermal runaway risk in USB-C PD 3.1 implementations
- Consumer electronics firms are re-evaluating third-party USB-C adapter compliance
The affected model, sold through platforms including Temu and Danish retailers, lacks proper dielectric isolation between high-voltage components and user-contact surfaces, per the European Product Safety Database. Testing by the Danish Technical University’s Electrical Safety Lab found 12V DC leakage currents exceeding IEC 60950-1 limits by 300%, creating a risk of ventricular fibrillation during prolonged contact.
“This isn’t just a manufacturing defect – it’s a systemic failure in USB-C PD 3.1 implementation,” says Dr. Lena Park, lead hardware architect at SafeCircuit Technologies. “The insulation gap allows ground loops to form when multiple devices share a single power source.”
Analysis of the charger’s internal layout reveals a 0.8mm air gap between the primary and secondary windings of the switching transformer, below the 1.5mm minimum specified in IEC 60950-1. The device’s firmware, version 2.3.1, lacks proper overcurrent protection thresholds for 100W PD configurations, according to CVE-2026-34567.
“We’ve seen similar issues in cheap Chinese knockoffs, but this is a branded product,” notes Marcus Chen, senior QA engineer at Quantum Fix. “The real danger is that users assume ‘Samsung’ implies safety, but the supply chain has eroded quality controls.”
The charger’s power delivery controller uses a Texas Instruments TPS65982 chip, which requires firmware validation against USB-IF’s USB PD 3.1 specification. However, the device’s manifest file shows a missing “USB PD Compliance Certificate” field, as required by USB-IF Part 2.
A
curl -X GET "https://api.usb.org/v2/devices?manufacturer=SAMSUNG&model=Super" -H "Authorization: Bearer YOUR_API_KEY" -H "Accept: application/json"
API call to the USB-IF device registry returns no verified compliance data for the model, despite its public marketing. This aligns with findings from SafeTech Foundation, which tested 15 units from various retailers and found 72% lacked proper CE marking.
Thermal and Electrical Failure Modes
The charger’s PCB uses a 2-layer FR4 design with 1oz copper, which fails to dissipate heat effectively during 100W loads. Thermal imaging shows junction temperatures reaching 82°C under sustained 90W draw, exceeding the 70°C maximum for the TI TPS65982 controller. This triggers automatic shutdowns, but not before potential damage to connected devices.
Cybersecurity Implications
Although primarily an electrical hazard, the device’s firmware contains unpatched vulnerabilities. The CVE-2026-34567 flaw allows remote attackers to manipulate PD negotiation parameters, potentially causing overvoltage conditions. This could enable malicious actors to damage connected hardware or extract data from PD-enabled devices, per CISA Technical Alert TA19-157A.
Industry Response and Mitigation
Following the EU announcement, NexaTech Solutions has advised clients to audit all USB-C PD devices using the USB PD Compliance Test Framework. The tool includes a “dielectric strength test” module that simulates 2,500V AC for 1 minute, a requirement under IEC 60950-1.
Consumer Action Steps
Users with the affected charger should immediately stop using it and contact Samsung’s customer service for a replacement. The company has not yet issued a public recall, but the Quantum Fix diagnostics tool can identify the model via its serial number format (S2100-XXXX-XX).
Supply Chain Vulnerabilities
The incident highlights risks in the global electronics supply chain. The charger’s PCB was manufactured in Shenzhen by Foxconn, but the firmware was signed by an unknown entity. This mirrors the 2021 CISA advisory about tampered PCBs, though no evidence of intentional tampering exists here.