Why so little talk of Dave Kleiman?

[TPTB_need_war]

I have now reviewed your analysis and have concluded you are talking out of your ass.

Please provide technical justification.

It's increasingly obvious that despite not being able to present actual cryptographic proof Wright is putting a lot of effort into obfuscation and trying to sway the public opinion, whether it's for his business interests or something else.

You do not seem to understand the math. Either Craig broke SHA256 or he has Satoshi's private key.

You do not seem to understand that linking to your own post doesn't prove anything. Can you post the public key, the message Wright signed, and the signature for everyone to see and verify?

The analysis was provided by others already. The review of that is ongoing here.

You, my friend are peerless; there can be no review of your work.

Do you enjoy being a troll?

You trolls can eat your words now.

[1713416532]

1713416532

[1713416532]

1713416532

[AgentofCoin]

I have now reviewed your analysis and have concluded you are talking out of your ass.

Please provide technical justification.

It's increasingly obvious that despite not being able to present actual cryptographic proof Wright is putting a lot of effort into obfuscation and trying to sway the public opinion, whether it's for his business interests or something else.

You do not seem to understand the math. Either Craig broke SHA256 or he has Satoshi's private key.

You do not seem to understand that linking to your own post doesn't prove anything. Can you post the public key, the message Wright signed, and the signature for everyone to see and verify?

The analysis was provided by others already. The review of that is ongoing here.

You, my friend are peerless; there can be no review of your work.

Do you enjoy being a troll?

You trolls can eat your words now.

Lol. I doubt that.

Your whole argument is based on something that hasn't even been performed publicly yet.
Your theory is based on a few pieces of code on CSW's blog and other people's word.
We still have to wait to see how CSW will actually sign the keys.

Your theory is based purely on speculation of what we think happened, instead of what we know.
If we know the signature (in theory) and the address (according to BBC), then what was the message?

[TPTB_need_war]

Lol. I doubt that.

Your whole argument is based on something that hasn't even been performed publicly yet.
Your theory is based on a few pieces of code on CSW's blog and other people's word.
We still have to wait to see how CSW will actually sign the keys.

Your theory is based purely on speculation of what we think happened, instead of what we know.
If we know the signature (in theory) and the address (according to BBC), then what was the message?

Quoted as documentation of your ignorance of the technical details.

Eventually you trolls will learn not to fuck with me.

[Gleb Gamow]

This is how Craig Steven Wright con everybody into believing that he and David Kleiman were partners.

http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=WKINFODEFENSERESEARCH%20L110000199040&aggregateId=flal-l11000019904-dce79b55-176a-4442-93a7-3c8896316aa2&searchTerm=w%26k%20info&listNameOrder=WKINFODEFENSERESEARCH%20L110000199040



02/16/2011 -- Florida Limited Liability was most likely created by David Kleiman himself. The following two images depicts the contents of the PDF: http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ConvertTiffToPDF?storagePath=COR%5C2011%5C0216%5C90321539.tif&documentNumber=L11000019904





That's the extent of the W&K INFO DEFENSE RESEARCH LLC corporation under David's control, he letting the entity lapse.

Now that it's lapsed, anybody can pick it up and reinstate it, which is exactly what somebody did.

03/28/2014 -- REINSTATEMENT: http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ConvertTiffToPDF?storagePath=COR%5C2014%5C0331%5C58356362.tif&documentNumber=L11000019904



The address in the red box is where David Kleiman lived and was found dead close to a year prior to the reinstatement of the org. The green box contains the new address of the biz. And the purple box contains the address associated with David Kleiman long before the advent of Bitcoin. Dave's signature is not on the doc because he was dead when the biz was reinstated. Ms Uyen T Nguyen is the person who signed the electronic filing.

[suchmoon]

Analysis of what? Please post the facts being analyzed, i.e. the public key, the message Wright signed, and the signature. The thread you linked to doesn't have that.

Your laziness isn't my fault. You find all the links if you click the link I provided to you upthread:

The three things that I asked for are nowhere to be found in the link you provided. There is only your own speculation.

So just to establish the facts - you DON'T have one or more of the following: the public key, the message Wright signed, the signature. Your claims that Wright cracked SHA256 are baseless.

[AgentofCoin]

Lol. I doubt that.

Your whole argument is based on something that hasn't even been performed publicly yet.
Your theory is based on a few pieces of code on CSW's blog and other people's word.
We still have to wait to see how CSW will actually sign the keys.

Your theory is based purely on speculation of what we think happened, instead of what we know.
If we know the signature (in theory) and the address (according to BBC), then what was the message?

Quoted as documentation of your ignorance of the technical details.

Eventually you trolls will learn not to fuck with me.

Yes, you were the first to discover that CSW discovered a "backdoor" in Bitcoin.
Your understanding of the technical details here is greatest over all others.  

[sirohige]

new article about dave kleiman
www.gizmodo.com.au/2016/05/is-dave-kleiman-the-missing-link-in-craig-wrights-satoshi-story/

[Gleb Gamow]

Lol. I doubt that.

Your whole argument is based on something that hasn't even been performed publicly yet.
Your theory is based on a few pieces of code on CSW's blog and other people's word.
We still have to wait to see how CSW will actually sign the keys.

Your theory is based purely on speculation of what we think happened, instead of what we know.
If we know the signature (in theory) and the address (according to BBC), then what was the message?

Quoted as documentation of your ignorance of the technical details.

Eventually you trolls will learn not to fuck with me.

Yes, you were the first to discover that CSW discovered a "backdoor" in Bitcoin.
Your understanding of the technical details here is greatest over all others.  

Paul Vernon discovered a backdoor of all of Cryptsy's users, evidence being the blood stains in the backside of their underwear.

[TPTB_need_war]

Analysis of what? Please post the facts being analyzed, i.e. the public key, the message Wright signed, and the signature. The thread you linked to doesn't have that.

Your laziness isn't my fault. You find all the links if you click the link I provided to you upthread:

The three things that I asked for are nowhere to be found in the link you provided. There is only your own speculation.

So just to establish the facts - you DON'T have one or more of the following: the public key, the message Wright signed, the signature. Your claims that Wright cracked SHA256 are baseless.

Are you fucking blind?

If you click any of these links in the link I provided to you several times, you will end up finding the links to the analysis done by others which has all the information you asked for:

https://github.com/patio11/wrightverification/blob/master/README.md

....

Craig Wright’s chosen source material (an article in which Jean-Paul Sartre explains his refusal of the Nobel Prize), surprisingly, generates the exact same signature as can be found in a bitcoin transaction associated with Satoshi Nakamoto.

The likelihood that a private key will generate two identical signatures when signing two different sources – a Bitcoin transaction on the one hand, and a Sartre text on the other – is so infinitesimally small that it is unlikely.

The only contention remaining is whether the Sartre text hashes to the hash Craig signed. Apparently no one has bothered to check that, even they are so damn quick to declare him a fraud without checking it.

[sirohige]

some fact
He was 46 and had made the most of his short life.
http://mpb.floridaweekly.com/news/2013-05-16/Community/Father_friends_mourn_a_sons_life_cut_short.html#.VyrUYRIeVbo

A friend found him dead in his house. The cause of death is unknown.
http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/news/local/obituary-former-pbso-deputy-dies-in-his-home/nXcqR/

[xhomerx10]

I have now reviewed your analysis and have concluded you are talking out of your ass.

Please provide technical justification.

It's increasingly obvious that despite not being able to present actual cryptographic proof Wright is putting a lot of effort into obfuscation and trying to sway the public opinion, whether it's for his business interests or something else.

You do not seem to understand the math. Either Craig broke SHA256 or he has Satoshi's private key.

You do not seem to understand that linking to your own post doesn't prove anything. Can you post the public key, the message Wright signed, and the signature for everyone to see and verify?

The analysis was provided by others already. The review of that is ongoing here.

You, my friend are peerless; there can be no review of your work.

Do you enjoy being a troll?

You trolls can eat your words now.

 As much as you enjoy quoting yourself.
I'm as much a troll as you are an investigator.

[owm123]

This is how Craig Steven Wright con everybody into believing that he and David Kleiman were partners.

http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=WKINFODEFENSERESEARCH%20L110000199040&aggregateId=flal-l11000019904-dce79b55-176a-4442-93a7-3c8896316aa2&searchTerm=w%26k%20info&listNameOrder=WKINFODEFENSERESEARCH%20L110000199040



02/16/2011 -- Florida Limited Liability was most likely created by David Kleiman himself. The following two images depicts the contents of the PDF: http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ConvertTiffToPDF?storagePath=COR%5C2011%5C0216%5C90321539.tif&documentNumber=L11000019904





That's the extent of the W&K INFO DEFENSE RESEARCH LLC corporation under David's control, he letting the entity lapse.

Now that it's lapsed, anybody can pick it up and reinstate it, which is exactly what somebody did.

03/28/2014 -- REINSTATEMENT: http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ConvertTiffToPDF?storagePath=COR%5C2014%5C0331%5C58356362.tif&documentNumber=L11000019904



The address in the red box is where David Kleiman lived and was found dead close to a year prior to the reinstatement of the org. The green box contains the new address of the biz. And the purple box contains the address associated with David Kleiman long before the advent of Bitcoin. Dave's signature is not on the doc because he was dead when the biz was reinstated. Ms Uyen T Nguyen is the person who signed the electronic filing.

What does it mean? Some explenation would be usefu. Who is Ms Uyen T Nguyen?

[TPTB_need_war]

I have now reviewed your analysis and have concluded you are talking out of your ass.

Please provide technical justification.

It's increasingly obvious that despite not being able to present actual cryptographic proof Wright is putting a lot of effort into obfuscation and trying to sway the public opinion, whether it's for his business interests or something else.

You do not seem to understand the math. Either Craig broke SHA256 or he has Satoshi's private key.

You do not seem to understand that linking to your own post doesn't prove anything. Can you post the public key, the message Wright signed, and the signature for everyone to see and verify?

The analysis was provided by others already. The review of that is ongoing here.

You, my friend are peerless; there can be no review of your work.

Do you enjoy being a troll?

You trolls can eat your words now.

As much as you enjoy quoting yourself.
I'm as much a troll as you are an investigator.

I empathize as I know jealously is an affliction of the incapable.

Enjoy your life.

[xhomerx10]

I have now reviewed your analysis and have concluded you are talking out of your ass.

Please provide technical justification.

It's increasingly obvious that despite not being able to present actual cryptographic proof Wright is putting a lot of effort into obfuscation and trying to sway the public opinion, whether it's for his business interests or something else.

You do not seem to understand the math. Either Craig broke SHA256 or he has Satoshi's private key.

You do not seem to understand that linking to your own post doesn't prove anything. Can you post the public key, the message Wright signed, and the signature for everyone to see and verify?

The analysis was provided by others already. The review of that is ongoing here.

You, my friend are peerless; there can be no review of your work.

Do you enjoy being a troll?

You trolls can eat your words now.

As much as you enjoy quoting yourself.
I'm as much a troll as you are an investigator.

I empathize as I know jealously is an affliction of the incapable.

Enjoy your life.

 You'd better look up the word empathize; you might have confused it with sympathize or maybe you're trying to be funny? 
 Thank you.  I do enjoy my life.

[TPTB_need_war]

Lol. I doubt that.

Your whole argument is based on something that hasn't even been performed publicly yet.
Your theory is based on a few pieces of code on CSW's blog and other people's word.
We still have to wait to see how CSW will actually sign the keys.

Your theory is based purely on speculation of what we think happened, instead of what we know.
If we know the signature (in theory) and the address (according to BBC), then what was the message?

Quoted as documentation of your ignorance of the technical details.

Eventually you trolls will learn not to fuck with me.

Yes, you were the first to discover that CSW discovered a "backdoor" in Bitcoin.
Your understanding of the technical details here is greatest over all others.  

And the first to:

1. Explain to Gmaxwell (in his CoinJoin thread from 2013) that he couldn't use a blacklist to fix jamming of CoinJoin
2. Solve the jamming problem of decentralized exchange.
3. Design a technical solution to the inherent centralization in Satoshi's proof-of-work.
4. Which included being the first to explain technically why Satoshi didn't solve the Byzantine Generals Problem.
5. The first to explain why Z.cash's Equihash is likely not ASIC resistant.
6. First to solve a decades old unsolved fundamental problem of computer science programming language theory.

Get off my lawn you jealous troll. You are wasting my and the readers' time.

[TPTB_need_war]

Ok but that's the stuff of reality shows like undercover boss. I would expect Satoshi to be above it.

Huh

Satoshi was about trustless systems, not reputation. So the only valid answer is in the cryptography. Talk is cheap, show me the code.

Satoshi is the ultimate undercover story.

The issue here is not whether Craig is really Satoshi (for all we know Satoshi was never a person but rather a working group).

Rather this is a battle over concepts and what is the meaning of cryptography in this brave new world.

If Bitcoin was planted with a double hash for apparently no reason and it comes to be that it is possible to create undecidability of signatures of user chosen text, this speaks to something about Satoshi.

Ah I see that I am spot on with where Craig is headed with this. Kudos to myself:

http://www.drcraigwright.net/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-proof/
http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/05/purported-bitcoin-creator-loses-an-ally-but-says-hell-show-more-proof/

Ostensibly Craig wants to prove that no one can prove they are Satoshi beyond any doubt, while also making it impossible to attack his claims that he was "the man behind the persona of Satoshi" in some form. That is a nebulous statement, as it could even mean he was mining Bitcoin early and thus being one of the testers "behind" the project in some sense. Remember afaik he has never claimed to be the Satoshi who coded Bitcoin. You will never find that direct quote. Rather he has claimed some relationship with Dave Kleiman and that being some important relationship involved in the inception of Bitcoin (perhaps just mining?).

Also if it turns out that he does reveal some Sartre text which hashes correctly, then this may implicate the double-hash which then implicates Satoshi, because no one can find any reason for why Satoshi chose double hashing. And I think double hashing is less secure as I explained in the OP. Surely Satoshi knew this also.

[Gleb Gamow]

some fact
He was 46 and had made the most of his short life.
http://mpb.floridaweekly.com/news/2013-05-16/Community/Father_friends_mourn_a_sons_life_cut_short.html#.VyrUYRIeVbo

A friend found him dead in his house. The cause of death is unknown.
http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/news/local/obituary-former-pbso-deputy-dies-in-his-home/nXcqR/

http://mpb.floridaweekly.com/news/2013-05-16/Community/Father_friends_mourn_a_sons_life_cut_short.html#.VyrwnoQrLrd

“He was strong as a bull, David. He was six feet tall, 200-plus pounds and he was a handsome devil, if ever there was one,” his father said.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2644005-DAVID-KLEIMAN-13-0467.html

5' 10"; 230 lbs

Amazing how an assumed improper diet causes a man to shrink two inches and gain thirty pounds.

“I think it was until his last stay in the hospital, that lasted 2½ to three years, that he lost a lot of body mass. He lost a lot of strength, going through five or six surgeries,” Mr. Paige said.

................

He became well-known in that field, said one of his business partners, Patrick Paige.

Their company, Computer Forensics LLC, has an office on Northlake Boulevard.

http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ConvertTiffToPDF?storagePath=COR%5C2014%5C0331%5C58356362.tif&documentNumber=L11000019904



Note the Northlake Boulevard address. I'm surprised that Paige hasn't come out and call foul.

[AGD]

some fact
He was 46 and had made the most of his short life.
http://mpb.floridaweekly.com/news/2013-05-16/Community/Father_friends_mourn_a_sons_life_cut_short.html#.VyrUYRIeVbo

A friend found him dead in his house. The cause of death is unknown.
http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/news/local/obituary-former-pbso-deputy-dies-in-his-home/nXcqR/

http://mpb.floridaweekly.com/news/2013-05-16/Community/Father_friends_mourn_a_sons_life_cut_short.html#.VyrwnoQrLrd

“He was strong as a bull, David. He was six feet tall, 200-plus pounds and he was a handsome devil, if ever there was one,” his father said.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2644005-DAVID-KLEIMAN-13-0467.html

5' 10"; 230 lbs

Amazing how an assumed improper diet causes a man to shrink two inches and gain thirty pounds.

“I think it was until his last stay in the hospital, that lasted 2½ to three years, that he lost a lot of body mass. He lost a lot of strength, going through five or six surgeries,” Mr. Paige said.

................

He became well-known in that field, said one of his business partners, Patrick Paige.

Their company, Computer Forensics LLC, has an office on Northlake Boulevard.

http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ConvertTiffToPDF?storagePath=COR%5C2014%5C0331%5C58356362.tif&documentNumber=L11000019904



Note the Northlake Boulevard address. I'm surprised that Paige hasn't come out and call foul.

Paige looks like he can be a

5' 10"; 230 lbs

: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bb5ODYaPynU

found on http://www.davekleiman.com/

edit:

http://www.davekleiman.com/experts-florida-miami-palm-beach-lauderdale-about.php

Computer Forensics LLC’s Principals

Click on each Computer Forensics Experts name to download a full CV

Carter Conrad – Carter brings more than 25 years of experience in information security and risk management. He has been qualified as an Expert Witness in Florida Circuit & Criminal Court, Federal Bankruptcy and Federal Criminal Court. He has many relevant industry certifications including the CCE, CISSP, Q/SA, Security+, and as a Langevin Learning Systems Technical Trainer. Carter is veteran trainer and has taught more than 25 classes across the United States, including Applied Computer Forensics, A+ & Security+ Bootcamps, and CISSP Prep Classes, assisting organizations to become DoD Directive 8570 compliant. Carter has vast experience in fraud mitigation and detection, with extensive training in compliance legislation, including: USA PATRIOT Act, Sarbanes-Oxley, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. He has dealt with both Public and Private Sector clients providing solutions in both logical and physical security domains.

Patrick Paige – Patrick brings more than 25 years of law enforcement investigation experience, including more than 10 year as a computer crimes detective. He has performed computer forensic examinations for the FBI, U.S. Customs, FDLE, Secret Service, ATF, and was a member of the South Florida ICAC taskforce for 10 years. In 2009 he was assigned to supervise the law enforcement operations for the Palm Beach County Sexual Predator Enforcement (SPE) at the located in Boca Raton FL. Patrick has extensive knowledge of undercover online investigations including online enticement and Peer-to-Peer networks. He has been involved with hundreds of cases and has testified in State,Federal, Appellate, and Military courts as a computer expert including testifying as an expert in the functionality of Encase® at a murder trial. Patrick has many forensic certifications including EnCE, and SCERS, additionally he is an EnCase® certified instructor and has taught many forensic analysts around the country. Patrick has earned many awards including Detective of the Month, U.S. Customs Service Unit Commendation Citation Award for computer forensic work, and has twice earned the Outstanding Law Enforcement Officer of the Year citation awarded by the United States Justice Department.

[crazywack]

Damn you and your investigations Gleb.... So interesting I can't keep out of this thread waiting for more finds.


Good job, wish I had your drive to find the truth!

[TPTB_need_war]

Does anyone know what black hole Bitcoin core (Blockstream) developer Gmaxwell moved the quoted thread to?

I can't find it any more and I have no deleted messages from that thread in my PM box.

Wholly shit! I am contemplating the possibility that Craig has revealed that who ever created Bitcoin put a backdoor in it!

As I already explained, the signature Craig has provided proves either he has cracked something about the way Bitcoin uses SHA256 or he has Satoshi's private key. Afaics, there are no other mathematical possibilities.

But note this small detail:

You'll note that Bitcoin, for reasons known only to Satoshi, takes the signature of hash of a hash to generate the scriptSig. Quoting Ryan:

Well that isn't so insignificant of a detail when you think more about it in this context.

A cryptographic hash function has a property named collision resistance. Collision resistance is related to preimage resistance in that if we have a way to quickly find collisions, then if the preimage is collision then we also break the preimage resistance for that particular hash value.

Collision resistance is normally stated as the number of hash attempts required to find a collision or the number of rounds to break collision resistance with reasonable hardware. Normally this is exponentially less than computing the SHA256 hash function 2²⁵⁶ times. For SHA256, there are collision resistance attacks up to 46 of the 64 rounds of SHA256 (and 52 of 64 rounds for preimage attack).

So what happens to collision (and preimage in this context) resistance when we hash the hash? Well all the collisions from the first application of hash become collisions in the second hash, plus the new collisions in the second application of the hash thus increasing the number of rounds that can be attacked.

It seems likely that Craig has identified the back door that was placed in Bitcoin as explained above, and used his supercomputer access to find a preimage of SHA256.

If am correct, this is major news and Bitcoin could crash.

I urge immediately peer review of my statements by other experts. I have not really thought deeply about this. This is just written very quickly off the top of my head. I am busy working on other things and can't put much time into this.