Can you identify me? 2.5BTC reward.

[jasinlee]

37.123.170.220 IP

Congrats, he hit my PM webbug also, it's a TOR exit node.

Code:

2013-04-06 12:42:22: 37.123.170.220

Yeah, it was worth a shot

Got another one 171.25.193.20 and 204.11.50.131

[1714559698]

1714559698

[1714559698]

1714559698

[1714559698]

1714559698

[1714559698]

1714559698

[1714559698]

1714559698

[1714559698]

1714559698

[BlindMixerDR]

He's actually looking for hard evidence that traces his account back to his original one, not similarities.

Correct. In fact, there are many replies here, so I'm going to change the rules.

New extra rules:

• Anything without "hard evidence" will be ignored, even if the "guess" is correct (note double quotes, even if I am only quoting "hard evidence" by Wardrick!). It needs to be something that would be strong enough to make the authorities knock on my door.
• If you are sure you are correct, then make a 0.005BTC donation to the Free Software Foundation https://my.fsf.org/donate/other/ (bitcoin address 1PC9aZC4hNX2rmmrt7uHTfYAS3hRbph4UN) or to torservers.net  https://www.torservers.net/donate.html (bitcoin address 14fadryvAkoXye2XtH4qSwSerhi7BX4rtG) and paste the transaction ID of the donation in your message. That will attract my attention. (these sites use a single bitcoin address for all donations)
• To avoid people making lots of extra user accounts and making lots of guesses, only accounts registered before the UTC time of this post are allowed to participate.

[BlindMixerDR]

For reference, these are the kinds of posts I will be ignoring.

You are Satoshi

What is your evidence?

Disclosure: You are Atlas

Reason:

I can change these rules at any time and will do so in OP (Original Post, the one you're reading)
the state of the OP at the time of claim is decisive for the rules, so please quote OP when claiming bounty

It doesn't get any more Atlas than this.

This is not evidence. Can you give more?

Scott J.
Dastanx
wachtwoord
fsb4000
bowjob

There are only 90000 members in this forum. You could try them all.

JMZ93
csmart93
BlindMixer

Only 89997 users left.

Ok I think I have you but I'm not going to just post it Mr Paul S...? Of #24?
Need I go on?

Yes you need to go on. What is the evidence?

casascius

Evidence?

MXRider
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=52194

Evidence?

In that case you need to change the description because you clearly stated that:

 I'll give away small amounts of bitcoin (0.05-0.1 BTC) to people pointing out flaws/mistakes/possible improvements regarding my anonymity

Saying that you're not using a vpn or a proxy is clearly pointing out a flaw.

It would be a flaw if you were correct. deepceleron and jasinlee have shown that I am using a proxy.

[deepceleron]

(removed my 2nd guess of galaxyabstractor w/ info & leaked password etc per his request...). My first conclusion is probably right, but it could be another sock puppet of the "primary user"; language use was enough to win the other "ID Me" thread. - DC

I added galaxyabstractor because of Sweden IP and membership in pirate party, previous Bitcoin development, language use of "IP-address".

[jasinlee]

Those are the ones that all had the same signature, which is not a common site.

[BlindMixerDR]

Well if the rules can arbitrarily change...

The reason I ask to PM me with real names and addresses, is to protect my privacy, but also to protect privacy of others if you are wrong. Please remove this, and show more evidence.

I am not changing the rules aribtrarily, just making it clear that guesses will be ignored. The donation applies only to posts which do not show "hard evidence". If you show "hard evidence" and you are correct, I will admit it. I have created a file with my username in it:

Code:

user@host$ (echo "My username is XXX"; dd if=/dev/random bs=512 count=1|base64) > whoami.txt
user@host$ sha256sum whoami.txt
d384d430d9b421fbe8f14014fd2784105af218352fb4168ab086c28cdf427fcd  whoami.txt
user@host$

I will show the file whoami.txt if

• You show hard evidence and you are correct or
• You show some evidence and make the donation and you are correct

I will decide what is "strong" evidence. "Some" evidence is needed just to demonstrate you are not doing stupid random guesses.

[MelMan2002]

He's actually looking for hard evidence that traces his account back to his original one, not similarities.

Correct. In fact, there are many replies here, so I'm going to change the rules.

New extra rules:

• Anything without "hard evidence" will be ignored, even if the "guess" is correct (note double quotes, even if I am only quoting "hard evidence" by Wardrick!). It needs to be something that would be strong enough to make the authorities knock on my door.
• If you are sure you are correct, then make a 0.005BTC donation to the Free Software Foundation https://my.fsf.org/donate/other/ (bitcoin address 1PC9aZC4hNX2rmmrt7uHTfYAS3hRbph4UN) or to torservers.net  https://www.torservers.net/donate.html (bitcoin address 14fadryvAkoXye2XtH4qSwSerhi7BX4rtG) and paste the transaction ID of the donation in your message. That will attract my attention. (these sites use a single bitcoin address for all donations)
• To avoid people making lots of extra user accounts and making lots of guesses, only accounts registered before the UTC time of this post are allowed to participate.

Very well - I feel pretty confident.
Tx ID: d8b9e9a98ad40cf7853d86b2eae5ccf898cb99040714d58cd7e1d8e5d55b22fe
http://blockchain.info/tx/d8b9e9a98ad40cf7853d86b2eae5ccf898cb99040714d58cd7e1d8e5d55b22fe

See my post above.

[jasinlee]

199.48.147.40 Someone keeps on releasing their tor address to me, if you are not on tor at some point that would be bad.

[BlindMixerDR]

Very well - I feel pretty confident.
Tx ID: d8b9e9a98ad40cf7853d86b2eae5ccf898cb99040714d58cd7e1d8e5d55b22fe
http://blockchain.info/tx/d8b9e9a98ad40cf7853d86b2eae5ccf898cb99040714d58cd7e1d8e5d55b22fe

See my post above.

I was going to reply to your post. I am not OpenYourEyes.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

If your not BitcoinPorn or RandyFolds, then you're this guy:

[BlindMixerDR]

You are Octavian - a difficult match since the other account has few posts:

1 - uncommon hyphenation in the word IP-address, over-hyphenation elsewhere,
2 - frequent use of slash/stroke to separate two options,
3 - 'single quotes' where they aren't needed, or when other posters would use "double quotes",
4 - And beginning sentence fragments with conjunction
5 - account was logged into yesterday (not abandoned...)


Just one example:

Subject: Are there security issues with Bitcoin for Free / Faucet-Services?

Hi WikileaksDude,
 I just asked a question - why getting personal?
There might be some 'Free Bitcoins'-sites which track BTC addresses when they are reused for the transactions history.
And the sites have the corresponding user's IP-address also...
Have a good day.

IRL?
https://twitter.com/OctavianMihai

https://si0.twimg.com/profile_images/62179944/tav.jpg

There are very thin threads connecting this IRL Octavian - exposure to Bitcoin through producing TWiST, but there are the single quotes all over the twitter. I'm choosing Mihai over Octavian Cara who is in the UK; the OP is leaking multilingual grammar.

This is not "hard evidence" but it might be enough to make the authorities to come to my door. Except I am not octavion. I am certainly not as good looking as him

[BlindMixerDR]

If your not BitcoinPorn or RandyFolds, then you're this guy:

http://tosh.comedycentral.com/blog/files/2013/04/thumbwhatsyourname.jpg

Hahaha. But I am better looking than him.

[gdbutler]

Sent you a PM, OP.

[BlindMixerDR]

(removed my 2nd guess of galaxyabstractor w/ info & leaked password etc per his request...). My first conclusion is probably right, but it could be another sock puppet of the "primary user"; language use was enough to win the other "ID Me" thread. - DC

I added galaxyabstractor because of Sweden IP and membership in pirate party, previous Bitcoin development, language use of "IP-address".

The text "IP-address" is cut and pasted from the original findmeifyoucan thread, linked in OP. It is not my grammar.

[molecular]

nice, I love this. Thanks for doing this BlindMixerDR, I was hoping someone would replicate the effort.

I think you already lasted longer than I did. However by your rules I wouldn't have had to admit discovery (no hard evidence).

I can give people here one hint: it's not molecular this time

Good luck!

[theymos]

I think he's consistently using the Tor browser bundle, so no easy attacks on my end. Maybe someone could run a few Tor nodes and we could try a Tor timing attack.

[BlindMixerDR]

nice, I love this. Thanks for doing this BlindMixerDR, I was hoping someone would replicate the effort.

I think you already lasted longer than I did. However by your rules I wouldn't have had to admit discovery (no hard evidence).

I can give people here one hint: it's not molecular this time

Good luck!

I read all your thread and I am following almost all the advice you received, but I think the evidence against you was very specific - if someone discovers a unique thing like that about me and links directly to my real user, then I will admit it. But you can see that people think "IP-address" or ' ' single quotes identify me, and they are not right yet. Also, you released some information about yourself, I will release only the URL of the onion website (it is not fully ready yet). But your bounty was 14BTC at $7 per bitcoin. Mine is 2.5BTC at $140 per bitcoin.

If everyone agrees, I will let molecular be the judge of what is "hard evidence". molecular must imagine he is the police chief trying to find out who I am, and must decide if he should spend lots of money to enter my home and to confiscate all my computers and then to pay the IT specialists much more money to investigate my computer hardware and to crack the encryption and so on. Obviously he cannot do it for just stupid random guesses. So if molecular says so, then I must respond to a post. Do you agree molecular?

edit: if everyone wants, I will also place 2.5BTC in escrow with a reputable hero member of the forum. But if someone does gets the right answer, then everyone needs to trust me to say the truth anyway.

edit: or to rubberhose the encryption 

[rme]

The proxy that you use:
http://catalogsytes.avk.lt/

Address in my signature

[molecular]

nice, I love this. Thanks for doing this BlindMixerDR, I was hoping someone would replicate the effort.

I think you already lasted longer than I did. However by your rules I wouldn't have had to admit discovery (no hard evidence).

I can give people here one hint: it's not molecular this time

Good luck!

I read all your thread and I am following almost all the advice you received, but I think the evidence against you was very specific - if someone discovers a unique thing like that about me and links directly to my real user, then I will admit it. But you can see that people think "IP-address" or ' ' single quotes identify me, and they are not right yet. Also, you released some information about yourself, I will release only the URL of the onion website (it is not fully ready yet). But your bounty was 14BTC at $7 per bitcoin. Mine is 2.5BTC at $140 per bitcoin.

If everyone agrees, I will let molecular be the judge of what is "hard evidence". molecular must imagine he is the police chief trying to find out who I am, and must decide if he should spend lots of money to enter my home and to confiscate all my computers and then to pay the IT specialists much more money to investigate my computer hardware and to crack the encryption and so on. Obviously he cannot do it for just stupid random guesses. So if molecular says so, then I must respond to a post. Do you agree molecular?

edit: if everyone wants, I will also place 2.5BTC in escrow with a reputable hero member of the forum. But if someone does gets the right answer, then everyone needs to trust me to say the truth anyway.

edit: or to rubberhose the encryption 

Hmm. How about this: everyone can be police, but an investigation incurs cost, so to simulate an investigation they'd have to put up some money (that goes to charity or to BlindMixerDR). Something like 0.2 BTC. They would receive a share of the bounty, of course. BlindMixerDR would have to answer yes/no to any (payed) police inquiry asking "are you xzy?". Of course someone having hard evindence could play the police role themselves, also.

That way wild guessing is disincentivised while still allowing for "hunches of a detective" not supported by hard evidence to play out (viable investigative method if I can believe TV shows . In other words: If someone is sure to have found you but has no hard evidence, he can still "corrupt" the police to pay a visit to you and see if it's you.

Am I just babbling nonsense?

[BlindMixerDR]

Hmm. How about this: everyone can be police, but an investigation incurs cost, so to simulate an investigation they'd have to put up some money (that goes to charity or to BlindMixerDR). Something like 0.2 BTC. They would receive a share of the bounty, of course. BlindMixerDR would have to answer yes/no to any (payed) police inquiry asking "are you xzy?". Of course someone having hard evindence could play the police role themselves, also.

That way wild guessing is disincentivised while still allowing for "hunches of a detective" not supported by hard evidence to play out (viable investigative method if I can believe TV shows . In other words: If someone is sure to have found you but has no hard evidence, he can still "corrupt" the police to pay a visit to you and see if it's you.

Am I just babbling nonsense?

Yes, I have already made rules to say that someone who has a hunch, and explains where the hunch comes from (so it is not just a guess), then they can make a donation to FSF or torservers.net. And if you make the donation, then I will answer. I only said 0.005BTC for the donation.  0.2BTC is $30 now, so that would be too much.

We could make the donation higher, and then I will also make another equal donation to the same charity (FSF or torservers). Is that fair? Is 0.02BTC ok?

But I want to make sure everyone understands: even if you pay the donation, if you just guess with no explanation of your guess, or with an explanation that is just invented, then I still won't answer. There needs to be a convincing reason.