Bitcoin Forum

It just ocurred to me, that if the NSA is wiretapping everything like Snowden claims then they should have the identity of Satoshi in their records.
 8)

What do you think?

YES.

what if he always routed through an encrypted tunnel to a vpn?

Satoshi is the NSA

SATOSHI is actually the code name for the secret cryptocurrency project, started in 2006.

I think this is true.

I suspect they are pärt of a government backed unit, i simply can not believe one person could do this they had help from a lot of  experts. Considering the front end spoke perfect english, a us or british unit. The psycholigy was to build a simple sound but flawed design to draw people in of a specific psychology that would adapt it to mainstream use to introduce a new paradigm

If the NSA created Bitcoin, why did the CIA need Gavin to brief them on what it was?

If Satoshi is not a real person then who ordered the Pizza?

Nakamoto SAtoshi aka Tatsuaki Okamoto isn't it obvious? ;)

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1gexxo/satoshi_nakamoto_aka_tatsuaki_okamotouniversal/ (http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1gexxo/satoshi_nakamoto_aka_tatsuaki_okamotouniversal/)

They probably do (as they apparently have something on everyone), but they extremely likely have no idea who he/they is/are.

No one will ever know until their dying day, and probably not even then, I doubt Satoshi would want his/their family haunted/terrorised by the governments and media of the world.

If we love the Bitcoin, as I'm sure we all do, we'd all do our best to protect his identity and re-focus media talks on the Bitcoin and not the creator. For as amazing as he is, its his creation that we should all marvel.

NSA paper, 1996: "How To Make A Mint: The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash". One referenced crypto expert is named Tatsuaki Okamoto.

http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm

Just admit it's you already!!    :P


Seriously though thanks for the link... fascinating.

Lex parsimoniae, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. Your explanation is far from the simplest one.

Reminds me of "NDAKOTA" anagram of "TANKADO" (Digital Fortress / NSA)  :P

It's definitely not an anagram:

S 2 1
A 3 3
T 2 3
O 3 3
H 1 0
I 1 1
N 1 0
K 1 2
M 1 1
U 0 1

Yves Adele Harlow ;)

The NSA creating Bitcoin would explain why satoshi's mined blocks have never gone anywhere ;)

So would this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=240301).   ;D ;D

is there any  resource for this info!? Would be interesting?


iam with u

Bingo

Because the NSA does not have the authority to create a currency so there can be no inter-agency knowledge that they did so.

The CIA may suspect or even know the NSA created it, but the NSA would never acknowledge it to them, so they had to find out about it from a different source.

made me laugh :D

You do not have the security clearance to know that, or to even ask the question.   

The NSA does not need to be authorized do do anything, they can just do what they please. They are effectively above the law, nobody asks them questions and if someone asks they would not need to answer.

One does not need any authorization to create a currency, every kid can do this at home (just see the altcoin forums) and unless you live in North Korea it is perfectly legal to do so, without authorization, without license, without anything.

The goal of encryption is to prevent an eavesdropper from reading messages, not to prevent them from tracking their source and destination.

Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) – and – as far as I know – any other connection-oriented protocol – connections carrying encrypted Application layer payload are – for content-irrespective tracking purposes – no different than ones carrying unencrypted Application layer payload.

I highly doubt they care who he is.

You've made a point that I've made before. Sending encrypted data is sound a horn, hey look at me. That's why you send your grocery lists in encryption. Sending visible encrypted data that appears as non-encrypted data sails by without notice. The down side is the time for encrypting a 'non-ecrypted' message can be lengthy. Time is an enemy of cryptography. If you can't encrypt it fast enough, it's useless usually. Same with decrypting, if it takes you 10 years to decrypt a message, the original message is useless.

Deterministic OTP's can be very useful. The base (any easily ready material, Bible, PowerBall, etc...) can be used as a base for creating an ∞ amount of OTP's

One Time Pads are proven to be uncrackable. Except the Rubber Hose technique, but even then a OTP could decrypt into many messages depending on how it was encrypted. Rubber Hose decryption = "Nixon did it", and the real decryption = "Obama did it". :P

Does it matter if the NSA started bitcoin? Even if they did, they really have no more influence than, say, the winklevoss twins on bitcoin. Unless, the NSA starts using their code cracking supercomputers to mine bitcoins and exponentially increase the mining difficulty. After all SHA-256 hashing could be involved in decrypting enemy files or networks which is the unofficial job of the NSA is.

I can buy it.

LOL they can still find you, ask some of the best crackers around who were arrested or convicted and sent to prison, one who lived 4 blocks from me that made news around the world

That was a great book ahaha

The NSA never started bitcoin. This rumor is (...).
Bitcoin is about anonomous people on internet, decentralized currency: NSA is the opposite!

have to agree with the above.

recent government action (liberty city raid, mt. gox account freezes) would suggest that the government is increasingly becoming aware of bitcoin. this is likely due to the sudden recent uptrend in interest in bitcoin. that confidence in bitcoin is rising, it would be foolish for the government to stand idly and watch the dollar devalue against the bitcoin.

alternatively, (im about to go out on the limb that sometimes you can't come back from), the wealthy elite are becoming increasingly aware of bitcoin for other reasons.
bitcoin creates a unique opportunity for rapid socioeconomic movement through class.

now, lower and middle class participants can hide wealth from government audit in a secure way without extensive legal expertise or large investments

now, low and middle class participants can assemble investment portfolios (again untaxed) with minimal cost of entry and returns that are seemingly impossible in the current market

this obviously will not jive with those that would determine the fiscal direction of the country. given that legislature in this country is mostly driven by the lobbying system, you'll oft find that fiscal policy supports the preservation of old wealth.

so, does any government have a hand in the creation of bitcoin? i doubt it severely. bitcoin seems to be a social revolution that a bunch of math/social engineering guys with a libertarian agenda cooked up.

methinks they (biggest brother) have been aware of it for longer than we suspect however. because i dont think bitcoin was the original idea. it was the final iteration of the idea that we all get to see. that started way before 2009. satoshi is a movement, a social philosophy against fiat.  im pretty sure the government, many different governments, are aware of the identities of the "founding fathers".

these are the reason i love BTC and i fear for its future


and, to put the final layer of paranoid icing on the crazy cake:
the nsa pays very special attention to this board, that it is one of the most public forums of thoughts/knowledge/experience concerning bitcoin. this forum IS the public opinion of bitcoin.

This is one of the people. I don't think this being is the only one man stuff. Why the being is exposed to public? What is the purpose?

None of the referenced crypto experts is Satoshi. Satoshi is certainly very familiar with the "CRYPTO, EUROCRYPT" book series from the Springer-Verlag going all the way back to the 80's.

And yes they do know who he is, so what.

It's not the One-Time Pads (OTPs) themselves which are unbreakable. Instead, certain ciphers cannot be broken if the key is truly random. However, this does not mean that a One-Time Pad (OTP) is truly a one-time pad as a truly-random pad will have a likelihood of being truly-randomly generated again reversely proportional to its' length. What this means is if the length of the pad is 1 binary digit (bit), then the next pad has a 50% chance of being the same; if the length of the pad is 2 binary digits (bits), then the next pad has a 25% chance of being the same; and so on. The name One-Time Pad (OTP) is misleading. From this moment on, I shall call such devices Truly-Random Pads (TRPs) as true randomness is their significance.

However, true randomness does not exist. You see, all particles in existence are at a certain position. From that position, the laws of physics dictate their motion. Therefore, all events in space are preset at this moment. In order to determine and/or alter the future of an isolated system, one would have to reside outside of it. I have observed this in 1997 or 1998 when analyzing something beyond your wildest imagination – it is one of my PANDORA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandora%27s_box)-grade projects; PANDORA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandora%27s_box) designating that it should never be made as it converges towards a collapse of the space-time system we're in, with extinction event (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event) being a mild term for the outcome.

This doesn't mention methods of coin generation or anonymity. They're simply discussing using cryptography to simplify existing payment mechanisms and boost security.

I can't see the government voluntarily giving up such a vast amount of power (the printing press) to the populace.

Lol

Most likely "Satoshi Nakamoto" read the paper – kind of like studying National Security Agencies' (NSAs') (https://www.nsa.gov/) Security-Enhanced Linux (SE-Linux) (https://www.nsa.gov/research/selinux/) – and built upon it.

It would raise suspicion if they didn't...



Don't forget that one of the things in the box was Hope...

That occurred to me, also, but:

• they either screwed up initially and named it after one of their research projects, or
• "Satoshi Nakamoto" read the paper and used the name.

But, why would "Satoshi Nakamoto" use their name? At this point I think it most-likely was created by the National Security Agency (NSA) (https://www.nsa.gov/) or one of the people who worked on the Satoshi paper. If I understood correctly, Bitcoin uses 2048-binary-digit-(bit) Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA), which is susceptible to a Time-Memory-Data (TMD) attack. If they precompute the keys,they can also use them to attack Bitcon as well as all other communications secured using "short" Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) keys.



Yes, I know. It was at the bottom and the only thing left trapped in the jar / box as Pandora closed it, while all evils of the world escaped from the jar / box.

You did not understood correctly.

Yes, but Satoshi is just a minor detail.

Satoshi used Windows + Visual Studio, and Windows always had a backdoor, so...

NSA is well aware the only individual with sufficient command of crypto, econ, and English to be Satoshi is Mircea Popescu.

But the straightlaced suits there can't stand him and they're afraid he'll take over, so they leave him alone.   ;D

<irony>Someone specializing in fine arts sounds very likely to be "Satoshi Nakamoto".</irony>

Following the Yellow Brick Road will lead to Satoshi. The NSA is very good at following roads but they aren't to good at going through a field of poisonous daisies.

This is like saying that Linux is always secure no mater what. US government uses Windows workstations and a lot of them for sensitive tasks. And how many Russian and Chinese moles there are infiltrated in NSA who know details about this supposed backdoor? Backdoor is too dangerous to implement because there is always chance that somebody will discover it by accident or other means.

I'm more inclined to think that NSA either does not know Satoshi's real identity or figured it out from information lying around in this forum.

I don't believe the NSA created bitcoin because they do not care about currency. The CIA might have a need to create it, the way TOR was created by US Navy Research Lab. But then Treasury would be against and so would the federal bank. The thing is, as much as people (not us on bitcointalk) want to believe, government usually do not know what his left foot is doing that would make his right foot go the opposite way. Many Black box projects are so secret that referencing it or even think about them would send you in jail. Look at the reaction from Lavabit. Can't talk about it. So financing a bitcoin black box project would not cost that much compared to a Los Alamos project or keeping all those people fed at Area 51 for all those years.

This could simply be the "virus escaping the lab" type scenario.

Ummm, I'm pretty sure Satoshi is 3 individuals by the names of Neal King, Vladimir Oksman and Charles Bry. Fast Company did that investigation on the identity of Satoshi. They tracked it down to a patent filed by these guys 72 hours after the bitcoin.org domain was created.

Is this just a coincidence? Seems doubtful. (See the excerpt from Wiki below)

Satoshi Nakamoto (and the creators of Bitcoin) are either these three individuals OR they are closely tied to a larger group responsible for creating Bitcoin.

One thing is certain he lived around the Dutch, German border area at the time when Bitcoin was coded. And yes NSA do know him so what.

The name Satoshi Nakamoto has a deeper meaning.
In Japanese Satoshi translates into "clear-thinking; quick-witted; wise." "Naka" can mean "inside" or "relationship" while "moto" is defined as "the origin; the cause; the foundation; the basis."

So we have "clear-thinking" "inside" "the foundation."
 

In game Battlefield 1942 there japanese bot called Satoshi. Forget his full name. Stop inventing deeper meaning to what was intended as cool sounding pseudonym. Like there is no really deeper meaning in Seppuku Fujitsu. But someone still might find a way to connect Seppuku Fujitsu to NSA :D

If NSA knows who Satoshi is then it might be safer for him to reveal that to whole world.

chances are... they know... who your mother is..  :P

now that's information worth governmental funding! I know who my mother is too!

Several months late but...
Satoshi didn't buy the pizzas, laszlo did.
Satoshi's perfectly real, though  ::)

Why does it matter who satoshi is/is not? Whether his identity is known or not would not make a big difference to Bitcoin.

What would be the use of Bitcoin if only the "agents" know about it?

Which he did.  No-one knows any IP he has ever connected from.  The guy was ultra careful.

What makes you all think the NSA created it over the CIA?  CIA has the higher beings working for them.

Isn't that even more suspicious?

Probably have considered views about the identity of the folks behind the satoshi working group

The NSA is not omniscient by any means, but it is hard to rule out the possibility

Wow! If this is true than I'm sure NSA already know about Satoshi

the NSA is watching us,  watch out  what you're going to type, if they know who Satoshi is, they can definitely track us down using our IPs!

*bump*

It's likely the real Satoshi has been suicided. The Stanley Meyer case is a good example of what happens to inventors when powerful groups / corporations start looking for you.

Quite likely that they do

So you would be able to ask that question.   :D

CIA != NSA

Hypothesis: Bitcoin is the creation of NSA, but only a few people inside NSA would know about it. CIA would go by the official story that Bitcoin was created by the lonely programmer Satoshi. Even if they knew the truth they wanted to pretend as if they believed in the official Satoshi story.

If he/they live in the USA, it's likely. If not, another intelligence agency might, but it's unlikely they would give the NSA their information on him/them.

Then who wrote this (http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-source?commentId=2003008%3AComment%3A52186)?

You're assuming Satoshi is one individual. This might ( for all we know ) be completely untrue. As someone suggested, it could be a codename for a project, or a group of people.

I doubt it.