[Cryptography] A Thought Experiment: Proof of Satoshi

[bit at ungeared.com]

From: cryptography <cryptography-bounces+mkapilkov=pace.edu at metzdowd.com> On Behalf Of Stephan Kinsella
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2021 7:09 PM
To: Osman Kuzucu <bizbucaliyiz at hotmail.com>
Cc: bit <bit at ungeared.com>; cryptography at metzdowd.com
Subject: Re: [Cryptography] A Thought Experiment: Proof of Satoshi

 

 

 

On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 4:39 PM Osman Kuzucu <bizbucaliyiz at hotmail.com <mailto:bizbucaliyiz at hotmail.com> > wrote:

Gönderen: bit <bit at ungeared.com <mailto:bit at ungeared.com> > adına cryptography <cryptography-bounces+bizbucaliyiz=hotmail.com at metzdowd.com <mailto:hotmail.com at metzdowd.com> >

Gönderildi: 21 Ocak 2021 Perşembe 00:16
Kime: cryptography at metzdowd.com <mailto:cryptography at metzdowd.com>  <cryptography at metzdowd.com <mailto:cryptography at metzdowd.com> >
Konu: [Cryptography] A Thought Experiment: Proof of Satoshi 

 

Since I don’t believe that a cryptographic signature or a transfer would constitute definitive proof (let me clarify my position, I do believe that such actions would present a very strong claim, just not bulletproof), what would?  Let’s have a thought experiment, we are approached by X who claims to be Satoshi, privately they have presented us with convincing enough evidence to take them seriously and now, they are asking our advice on how to reveal themselves to the world without recreating Craig Wright’s ensued bedlam?   

 What do we know about satoshi? His e-mail was hacked, and other social media account of his also could be hacked too. You mentioned that the cryptographic signature can't be bulletproof too, so what else would be? Since we don't know anything about who he was, or he didn't have any witnesses at the time he deployed Bitcoin (who could verify his identity) and no one came forward so far, I believe at this point we can't take anything as a bulletproof. 

 

I personally tend to think it would take a combination of on-chain and off-chain evidence to serve as the ultimate proof.

 

Maybe testimony from a credible contemporaneous witness would be believable.  

 

Personally, I don’t think testimony alone would be enough. Not even sure what this testimony would look like. Someone saying that such and such told them that they were Satoshi? Or they saw something. I just don’t think it would be definitive. 

 

Also, the chances of his cryptographic keys getting leaked is less than someone impersonating his writing style to be claimed as Satoshi. I believe now there is no bulletproof way of knowing who they were. Only exception could be if he didn't use a VPN, the IP logs of the first bitcoin node could be retrieved or maybe some logs on the bitcointalk could be searched from the ISP to reveal his identity. 

 

I think Satoshi was using Tor.

_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography at metzdowd.com <mailto:cryptography at metzdowd.com> 
https://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metzdowd.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcryptography&data=04%7C01%7Cmkapilkov%40pace.edu%7Cb8d18c48575b409071a008d8bf3f8227%7C0799c53eca9a49e88901064a6412a41d%7C1%7C0%7C637469626771840117%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=YZV3PI70YxCucfZbEn3aS8Kd1P8VLNspwFiZ3dPvLKQ%3D&reserved=0> 




 

-- 


Stephan Kinsella
nskinsella at gmail.com <mailto:nskinsella at gmail.com> 
(+1) 713-416-0006 (mobile)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20210123/1d8d89c5/attachment.htm>