Bitcoin Forum

How to evaluate a claim that a certain person is Satoshi Nakamoto

If someone steps forward to claim that they are Satoshi Nakamoto, or is outed as such, there likely will be evidence put forward to substantiate the claim. We thought it would be useful to write down some facts that could be used by journalists and other curious individuals in assessing the credibility of any such evidence.

We don’t believe it matters who Satoshi is, but his identity is arguably of public interest and any purported revelation will be covered in the press. Given that the media has twice identified the wrong person based on mistaken readings of circumstantial evidence, we wanted to put down some notes on how to critically assess evidence that a certain person is Satoshi.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IwUiLlARSzf0L-nNI7gR-hHVHW_y6YM0OsiEweHBa6M/edit?pref=2&pli=1

http://www.fawkes-maske.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cropped-Header.jpg

Having the keys to 1000000 is all he should need to prove it's him.  Don't think there is anyone else that has close to that many.

I believe this is the correct path by which we should determine the truth in these situations.
This is a fair and understandable approach that the community and media should be guided by.

Good work.

possibly sending bitcoin from the earliest possible wallet, which I think is the coins generated in the 1st block after the genesis block.  I suppose it still dosn't prove identity, but it would be pretty impressive..... ;)

Good article.
The bitcoin.org domain was
registered on August 18, 2008 , two
months before the Bitcoin white
paper was first released, and it is
generally accepted that it was
Satoshi who registered it . (For one
thing, the first message from Satoshi
to the Cryptography mailing list
announcing the Bitcoin white paper
on October 31, 2008 contained a link
to a PDF of the white paper hosted
at bitcoin.org.)
If Satoshi registered that domain himself,he must have given his personal info to domain registrar (a prerequisite to register any domain).Does it means,that domain registrar has information about Satoshi?

It would definitely add to some credibility, but I would prefer that Satoshi didn't move any of his coins.

If he did that, it could cause unknown effects on the bitcoin economy that may be irreversible.
I do not believe the real Satoshi Nakamoto would want to destroy users investments and his experiment.

If Bitcoin/bitcoin should fail and die, it should do so on its own merits, and not by the creators hand.
Such an intervention, to me, seems counter to what Satoshi created Bitcoin/bitcoin for.
Craig Wright has purportedly made statements that he: "wants to take control of bitcoin back".

---

Satoshi most likely used a VPN and TOR.
In addition, he used an anon website registration service, see Theymos quote below.

Is that figure a dead cert? I thought no one was quite sure exactly how many he was in control of.

Hard to build on though.

So satoshi is not entitled to his profits, for the greater good.
Yet every other Donkey holding bitcoin is?

If Satoshi has held the key to a millionish so far untouched coins, maybe he can be trusted in the future. (a bit)

Maybe the possibility should be priced in, regardless of the current claim.

The first address 1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa Is designed to give the proof of Nakamoto. A message signed by this address will be considered as proof.

What i think of when someone claims to be Satoshi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8h_v_our_Q