It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
His admission follows years of speculation about who came up with the original ideas underlying the digital cash system.
Mr Wright has provided technical proof to back up his claim using coins known to be owned by Bitcoin's creator.
Prominent members of the Bitcoin community and its core development team say they have confirmed his claims.
But many others in the Bitcoin world are asking for more proof.
I remember reading that quote many years ago, and I have carried it with me uncomfortably ever since. However, after many years, and having experienced the ebb and flow of life those years have brought, I think I am finally at peace with what he meant. If I sign Craig Wright, it is not the same as if I sign Craig Wright, Satoshi.
JoukeH discovered that the signature on Craig Wright's blog post is not a signature of any "Sartre" message, but just the signature inside of Satoshi's 2009 Bitcoin transaction. It absolutely doesn't show that Wright is Satoshi, and it does very strongly imply that the purpose of the blog post was to deceive people.
So Craig Wright is once again shown to be a likely scammer. When will the media learn?
So, over the coming days, I will be posting a series of pieces that will lay the foundations for this extraordinary claim, which will include posting independently-verifiable documents and evidence addressing some of the false allegations that have been levelled, and transferring bitcoin from an early block.
For some there is no burden of proof high enough, no evidence that cannot be dismissed as fabrication or manipulation. This is the nature of belief and swimming against this current would be futile.
You should be sceptical. You should question. I would.
I will present what I believe to be “extraordinary proof” and ask only that it be independently validated.
The Problem With the Public Proof
Under other circumstances, the Bitcoin community could almost be convinced by Andresen’s account, too. But in contrast to Andresen’s private demonstration, the evidence that Wright publicly offered to support his claim almost immediately collapsed. “The procedure that’s supposed to prove Dr. Wright is Satoshi is aggressively, almost-but-not-quite maliciously resistant to actual validation,” wrote security researcher Dan Kaminsky early Monday. After more analysis, Kaminsky updated that assessment: “OK, yes, this is intentional scammery.”
TLDR: Evidence that Dave Kleiman (the dead partner of Wright) was also a Windows programmer with a very strong background on security.
He developed a product (called S-Lok) distributed by S-Doc as a security tool (a sort of hardening tool-kit)
At S-Doc, cryptography was heavily used to develop several products, broadly aimed at reliable and verifiable transmission of data and messages, centred around the idea of a an "unalterable, encrypted audit log system".
I think this paints Kleiman as a very plausible author of the first Bitcoin software
When the news that Craig Wright could have been Satoshi emerged, I purchased his book “The IT Regulatory and Standards Compliance Handbook” in order to search for clues that he was Satoshi.
I was disappointed. The book is published in 2008; more precisely, it says “this week” referring to February 2008 (p. 644), terefore when Satoshi would have been fully working on Bitcoin.
There book deals with other subjects, but there are several occasions where something bitcoin-like could have emerged. For example, all mentions to cryptography are rather vague (ok, the book’s subject does not require a LOT of crypto, but nevertheless...). Digital signatures are treated (they are generally called “electronic signatures”), but again nothing that echoes concepts that would return in Bitcoin.
So, no proof that he was NOT Satoshi, but no evidence that he had similar interests in that period, either.
I then started giving a look at the books authored by Dave Kleiman. There are a few, generally dealing with Windows security including one co-authored (among others) with Craig Wright.
Then I stumbled on his book “Winternals Defragmentation, Recovery, and Administration Field Guide” There is an interesting bio of Kleiman in that Amazon page, listing his titles, and containing:
He has developed a Windows Operating System lockdown tool, S-Lok (www.s-doc.com/products/slok.asp ), which surpasses NSA, NIST, and Microsoft Common Criteria Guidelines.
So, we now know that Kleiman was a security expert, was good at Windows security, and had written software for Windows.
The web site for the company seems down, but archive.org helps here:
This is a mirror of the page about the program written By Kleiman on the company’s site, taken in the months he was probably working on Bitcoin.
The software is described thus:
The S-LokTM system is a Comprehensive System Hardening Solution that dramatically enhances your OS security by appropriately altering your system registry, security database and file system ACL's.
(from its technical brochure )
Nothing too exciting here. A software related to security, but a quite boring one.
It gets more interesting when you start looking at the line of products that were being developed at s-Doc. This page lists a few PDFs about them: web.archive.org...://www.s-doc.com/technical/technical.asp
mirrored in drive.google.com...
Basically, it was a suite of products allowing cryptographically secure distribution of data and messages:
S-doc™ develops products that solve the most urgent business problems of the Information Age. They protect sensitive information during transport over an open network and when at rest during server storage
It’s nothing specifically bitcoin-like, but yet it’s an environment heavily imbued with cryptography:
The encryption algorithm (Triple DES, Skipjack or Rijndael/AES at a key length of 168, 96 and 128 bits, respectively), chosen at the time of system installation, is seeded by SITT using an RNG (Random Number Generator). Either a standard hardware white-noise generator or FIPS 186-2 approved pseudo-algorithm generates the unique encryption key for each and every transaction.
The core of the system seems to have been “an unalterable, encrypted audit log system”.
S-doc solutions include an unalterable, encrypted audit log system. All transaction activity and user access is available to authorized administrators, originators and compliance officers without exposing the underlying information.
(reminding of zero-knowledge proof)
What I also found interesting is the document about S-Doc's applications in finance and insurance: drive.google.com...
Once again emphasis is placed on the “unalterable, encrypted audit log system” log.
In conclusion: There is of course no direct evidence of Bitcoin in the material, but it can be seen that S-Doc was a place where creative uses of cryptography were usual.
Also, concepts like “unalterable, encrypted audit log system” were common knowledge at S-Doc.
Dave Kleiman was an accomplished Windows programmer, with exactly the technical capabilities and the cultural history one would expect from the author of the Bitcoin software
I think he is by far the best candidate for this title.