So it looks like Cobra is planning on passing on the Bitcoin.org domain

[DooMAD]

Sure, one bit needs to be unfucked from ABC shitlord, that s true and EDA must go asap.
Afaik it is on the road map. But its not a consensus relevant issue, working transactions is the most critical thing

Removing it now won't matter.  It's too late for that.  

If you use an old client that was made when satoshi was still around and tried to get it to synchronise, any blocks mined under EDA are invalid and will be rejected.  This means that neither the BSV nor BCH chain can ever sync from the genesis block using satoshi's own code.  Go ahead and try it for yourself.  The damage can't be undone and your chain is forever tainted with it.  It will always be a forkcoin with different consensus rules.  Never the original.

The only way to sync to the BSV chain is to alter satoshi's code to change the consensus rules.  Otherwise satoshi's code will sync to the BTC chain.  




//EDIT:  Looks like hv_ doesn't have a witty answer for this one and instead chose to reply to some other posts with points they feel they can dodge more easily.  Oh well.


//DOUBLE EDIT:  And could people please trim their nested quotes down a bit?  Topic is swiftly becoming an arduous scroll-fest.  You don't need to include a running history of the last 5 or more posts to reply to the latest one.

[1714951859]

1714951859

[1714951859]

1714951859

[DaCryptoRaccoon]

That domain should come into the hands of the community if that is handed over to BCH for any sum of money then we really are in trouble.

Do we have any ideas on who might be suitable to take this over?

[kezinaur14]

From his recent thread on GitHub:

https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/issues/3332

And then, I saw this:


https://reddit.com/r/btc/comments/gj36c9/bitcoinorg_owner_cobra_on_blockstream_fucking/fqiaylq/

Though I doubt Cobra will just sell the domain to someone like Roger, holy fuck if Roger actually gets to own two high-authority Bitcoin domains.

I hate how inmature people like him make the space look, the guy is trying to make an offert, no need to name call people like that. I know the space is young and all but it just makes us look bad when people act like this, imo.

[BitcoinFX]

...snip...

- Still Gavin to fit best  here  imo

 

*Facepalm*

"We know, Gavin, we know. If only you could reflect back on that one moment in 2016... you know, with Craig Wright, and the impossible Satoshi block signing? After which Craig was empowered to ramp up his Bitcoin hijack fraud?

https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/1265426554961657858 "

- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1266054135570366471

...

Quote Gavin:

"I have been bamboozled many times."

- https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/1265426554961657858

...

"Bitcoin has survived countless attacks on its decentralization. As an example here’s an early, once-credible developer calling a few years ago for the decimation of full nodes, a core network feature that, among other things, prevents corporate or state hijacking of the protocol.

https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/865256875658498049 "

- https://twitter.com/gladstein/status/1265323202277806082

...

Quote Gavin:

"I'm proud to be part of the 99+% not running a full node. Zero reason for me to waste bandwidth monitoring other people's transactions."
- https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/865256875658498049

 

...

"What a total and absolute bell-end." - SWIM

[BitcoinFX]

Gavin ..  ?

Nah ...

...

Not *Satire*

Party pooper FX!

I was having trouble replying to that, but first I had to make sure who Gavin might be.
And when I did - amidst congratulating hv_ for his sharpness - I decided not to.


...snip...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Andresen

...

*Satire*
Happy Mondays - Wrote For Luck (Call The Cops)
- https://youtu.be/oYPS0Y-_zhE

[hv_]

Gavin ..  ?

Nah ...

...

Not *Satire*

Party pooper FX!

I was having trouble replying to that, but first I had to make sure who Gavin might be.
And when I did - amidst congratulating hv_ for his sharpness - I decided not to.


...snip...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Andresen

...

*Satire*
Happy Mondays - Wrote For Luck (Call The Cops)
- https://youtu.be/oYPS0Y-_zhE

Witch-hunt-trolling memers,  why those guys think (cough) , they doing sth good for Bitcoin ?

[Wind_FURY]

Though I doubt Cobra will just sell the domain to someone like Roger, holy fuck if Roger actually gets to own two high-authority Bitcoin domains.

I don't think Cobra will just hand over the domain to Roger, as we can see the reply on twitter. He will definitely hand over to someone trusted and of course a supporter of BTC.
It would be better if some trusted from the bitcointalk forum could have the access of it, may be theymos?

theymos controls too many resources, it's better to pick somebody else, even though he's obviously very trustworthy.

Couldn't you leave the domain to him, for temporary safe-keeping until a worthy candidate is chosen? Or let theymos help you choose one?

Plus do you have a list of names of possible good candidates? Curious.

Reread the above in Bold RED, Confused_Fury.

Cobra got this,

it is amazing how many of you are concerned about his domain transfer ,

Of course, but you would want it to handed over to some like, Roger Ver? Right? Go to https://www.bitcoin.com, click "Buy Bitcoin".

Is that what you want?

theymos is also giving, and patient enough to let your trolling ass stay.

Bitcoin is highly decentralized   BSV, BCH, BTC, BTG, LTC, ...  freedom of choice - how you map ONE to the bitcoin.org ?  

oh - check the only legit White-Paper and lookup & compare the implementations

Newbies, this is the kind of disinformation these trolls spread around the internet. Be careful, or you end up being thankful for being scammed to buy a forked shitcoin.

- Still Gavin to fit best  here  imo

He also introduced the fraud Craig Wright as Satoshi. Why?

[hv_]

Though I doubt Cobra will just sell the domain to someone like Roger, holy fuck if Roger actually gets to own two high-authority Bitcoin domains.

I don't think Cobra will just hand over the domain to Roger, as we can see the reply on twitter. He will definitely hand over to someone trusted and of course a supporter of BTC.
It would be better if some trusted from the bitcointalk forum could have the access of it, may be theymos?

theymos controls too many resources, it's better to pick somebody else, even though he's obviously very trustworthy.

Couldn't you leave the domain to him, for temporary safe-keeping until a worthy candidate is chosen? Or let theymos help you choose one?

Plus do you have a list of names of possible good candidates? Curious.

Reread the above in Bold RED, Confused_Fury.

Cobra got this,

it is amazing how many of you are concerned about his domain transfer ,

Of course, but you would want it to handed over to some like, Roger Ver? Right? Go to https://www.bitcoin.com, click "Buy Bitcoin".

Is that what you want?

theymos is also giving, and patient enough to let your trolling ass stay.

Bitcoin is highly decentralized   BSV, BCH, BTC, BTG, LTC, ...  freedom of choice - how you map ONE to the bitcoin.org ?  

oh - check the only legit White-Paper and lookup & compare the implementations

Newbies, this is the kind of disinformation these trolls spread around the internet. Be careful, or you end up being thankful for being scammed to buy a forked shitcoin.

- Still Gavin to fit best  here  imo

He also introduced the fraud Craig Wright as Satoshi. Why?

Information  - not mis - information,  u just missed that, now you re biased and ad hominem idiot anyway - again, what 'good' are you doing here?  Tellin ppl ad hominem is the thing in Bitcoin ?

[Wind_FURY]

Information  - not mis - information,  u just missed that, now you re biased and ad hominem idiot anyway - again, what 'good' are you doing here?  Tellin ppl ad hominem is the thing in Bitcoin ?

Ad hominem for what actually? Pointing out facts?

BSV is a forked-shitcoin, Gavin introduced Craig Wright to be "Satoshi", Craig Wright turned out to be a liar, and a fraud based on evidences against him.

Now, we're being off-topic, who's your candidate to control bitcoin.org? I'm curious.

[BitcoinFX]

...snip...

He also introduced the fraud Craig Wright as Satoshi. Why?

Information  - not mis - information,  u just missed that, now you re biased and ad hominem idiot anyway - again, what 'good' are you doing here?  Tellin ppl ad hominem is the thing in Bitcoin ?

Gavin 'visited' the CIA to 'talk' about Bitcoin ...

Topic: Gavin will visit the CIA
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6652.0

1. He is either complicit in participating in a failed 'takeover' / 'hijack' of the Bitcoin (BTC) project.

or

2. He was genuinely 'bamboozled' by CSW - which would happen to be extreemly 'convenient' given the now hard evidence presented to the court ...

Re: SCAM: Bitcoin SV (BSV) - fake team member and plagiarized white paper
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5149062.msg54513860#msg54513860

... i.e. perhaps Gavin is/was 'complicate' in supporting the CSW / BSV 'fraud' !?

Either way it is still a total clown show! ...

Dan Kaminsky's Blog - Validating Satoshi (Or Not)
- https://dankaminsky.com/2016/05/02/validating-satoshi-or-not/

"SUMMARY:

    Yes, this is a scam.  Not maybe.  Not possibly."

...

Proof-of-beats - Signal - To - Noise Ratio -- Vitalik Mic Drop
- https://soundcloud.com/proofofbeats/signal-to-noise-ratio-vitalik-mic-drop

 

...

The funniest part (for me) is I'm now actually 99.9% certain I know who the real Satoshi Nakamoto is. They genuinely went onto work on 'other things' and from what I've been able to research thus far, I'm both impressed and reassured.

If Gavin and some other folks don't actually know who the real Satoshi likely is then I'm afraid to say that a lot of people in the Bitcoin / crypto space that I once thought were very smart are in fact quite the opposite, and/or were simply following others 'agendas' or, like I said above ... fully complicate.

Craig Wright is NOT satoshi and BSV is NOT Bitcoin.

The BSV 'metanet' is an insecure joke, 'built' on quick sand ...
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5149062.msg54518146#msg54518146

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is also NOT Bitcoin. It is a minority fork ... the real satoshi told us what happens to minority (chain) forks here ...

...snip...

Satoshi did anticipate forks and the likely outcome ...

A second version would be a massive development and maintenance hassle for me.  It's hard enough maintaining backward compatibility while upgrading the network without a second version locking things in.  If the second version screwed up, the user experience would reflect badly on both, although it would at least reinforce to users the importance of staying with the official version.  If someone was getting ready to fork a second version, I would have to air a lot of disclaimers about the risks of using a minority version.  This is a design where the majority version wins if there's any disagreement, and that can be pretty ugly for the minority version and I'd rather not go into it, and I don't have to as long as there's only one version.

I know, most developers don't like their software forked, but I have real technical reasons in this case.

...snip...

Satoshi warned us alright.

...snip...

Bitcoin = BTC which is the official and original version of the software ...

- https://web.archive.org/web/20090303195936/http://bitcoin.org/

...

You also mentioned Jon Matonis earlier in this thread @hv_ ...

Who was on nChain's payroll at one time ... and seemingly likes to try and 'backdoor' cryptography 'products' for the 'highest bidder' ...

Hushmail To Warn Users of Law Enforcement Backdoor
- https://www.wired.com/2007/11/hushmail-to-war/

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail

- https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Jon_Matonis

Jon Matonis Joins Blockchain Pioneer nChain as Vice President of Corporate Strategy
- https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/jon-matonis-joins-blockchain-pioneer-nchain-as-vice-president-of-corporate-strategy-300449153.html

 

Anymore for anymore ?

[konfuzius5278]

...snip...

He also introduced the fraud Craig Wright as Satoshi. Why?

Information  - not mis - information,  u just missed that, now you re biased and ad hominem idiot anyway - again, what 'good' are you doing here?  Tellin ppl ad hominem is the thing in Bitcoin ?

Gavin 'visited' the CIA to 'talk' about Bitcoin ...

Topic: Gavin will visit the CIA
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6652.0

1. He is either complicit in participating in a failed 'takeover' / 'hijack' of the Bitcoin (BTC) project.

or

2. He was genuinely 'bamboozled' by CSW - which would happen to be extreemly 'convenient' given the now hard evidence presented to the court ...

Re: SCAM: Bitcoin SV (BSV) - fake team member and plagiarized white paper
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5149062.msg54513860#msg54513860

... i.e. perhaps Gavin is/was 'complicate' in supporting the CSW / BSV 'fraud' !?

Either way it is still a total clown show! ...

Dan Kaminsky's Blog - Validating Satoshi (Or Not)
- https://dankaminsky.com/2016/05/02/validating-satoshi-or-not/

"SUMMARY:

    Yes, this is a scam.  Not maybe.  Not possibly."

...

Proof-of-beats - Signal - To - Noise Ratio -- Vitalik Mic Drop
- https://soundcloud.com/proofofbeats/signal-to-noise-ratio-vitalik-mic-drop

 

...

The funniest part (for me) is I'm now actually 99.9% certain I know who the real Satoshi Nakamoto is. They genuinely went onto work on 'other things' and from what I've been able to research thus far, I'm both impressed and reassured.

If Gavin and some other folks don't actually know who the real Satoshi likely is then I'm afraid to say that a lot of people in the Bitcoin / crypto space that I once thought were very smart are in fact quite the opposite, and/or were simply following others 'agendas' or, like I said above ... fully complicate.

Craig Wright is NOT satoshi and BSV is NOT Bitcoin.

The BSV 'metanet' is an insecure joke, 'built' on quick sand ...
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5149062.msg54518146#msg54518146

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is also NOT Bitcoin. It is a minority fork ... the real satoshi told us what happens to minority (chain) forks here ...

...snip...

Satoshi did anticipate forks and the likely outcome ...

A second version would be a massive development and maintenance hassle for me.  It's hard enough maintaining backward compatibility while upgrading the network without a second version locking things in.  If the second version screwed up, the user experience would reflect badly on both, although it would at least reinforce to users the importance of staying with the official version.  If someone was getting ready to fork a second version, I would have to air a lot of disclaimers about the risks of using a minority version.  This is a design where the majority version wins if there's any disagreement, and that can be pretty ugly for the minority version and I'd rather not go into it, and I don't have to as long as there's only one version.

I know, most developers don't like their software forked, but I have real technical reasons in this case.

...snip...

Satoshi warned us alright.

...snip...

Bitcoin = BTC which is the official and original version of the software ...

- https://web.archive.org/web/20090303195936/http://bitcoin.org/

...

You also mentioned Jon Matonis earlier in this thread @hv_ ...

Who was on nChain's payroll at one time ... and seemingly likes to try and 'backdoor' cryptography 'products' for the 'highest bidder' ...

Hushmail To Warn Users of Law Enforcement Backdoor
- https://www.wired.com/2007/11/hushmail-to-war/

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail

- https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Jon_Matonis

Jon Matonis Joins Blockchain Pioneer nChain as Vice President of Corporate Strategy
- https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/jon-matonis-joins-blockchain-pioneer-nchain-as-vice-president-of-corporate-strategy-300449153.html

 

Anymore for anymore ?

Just interesting. What is your idea who is satoshi? Me personal think its a team

[BitcoinFX]

...snip...

Just interesting. What is your idea who is satoshi? Me personal think its a team

Unfortunately, that's not how this works. It's seemingly Nakamoto's (current) choice. I can respect that decision.

If I'm right, they may surface again, eventually.

"I can neither confirm nor deny the identity of Satoshi."

Having looked for who was not Satoshi for years, I'm actually surprised how easy it was to find this highly likely candidate. I stumbled upon it actually, everything fits together perfectly.

It became a team, if you will, however the originator was seemingly just one individual.

Hal was likely more involved than he let on, he may or may not of known the real identity of Nakamoto.

Again, "I can neither confirm nor deny the identity of Satoshi."

...

If your read this, Nakamoto ... and you are in fact 'Satoshi' ... then you know I know ...

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto ? Suspects, frauds and conspiracies on bitcointalk
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4359615.msg54513677#msg54513677

  

[lionelpaul]

Selling bitcoin.org to Roger Ver or any other people claiming to be Satoshi would be a tragedy, and a complete disaster for Bitcoin.

BCH and BSV have damaged Bitcoin and its image, slowed down its adoption and massively increased the confusion about it.

Giving bitcoin.org to these guys could simply kill Bitcoin.

If you don't want to update bitcoin.org anymore, just leave it dormant: a single page explaining what Bitcoin is, with a link to the original Satoshi PDF paper.

But don't sell this domain. Please, just don't.

[mindrust]

Selling bitcoin.org to Roger Ver or any other people claiming to be Satoshi would be a tragedy, and a complete disaster for Bitcoin.

BCH and BSV have damaged Bitcoin and its image, slowed down its adoption and massively increased the confusion about it.

Giving bitcoin.org to these guys could simply kill Bitcoin.

If you don't want to update bitcoin.org anymore, just leave it dormant: a single page explaining what Bitcoin is, with a link to the original Satoshi PDF paper.

But don't sell this domain. Please, just don't.

Giving bitcoin.org to Roger Ver would create a social attack on Bitcoin.

If bitcoin can be killed like this (by social attacks), it didn't deserve to live in the first place.

I thought there was no official web page for bitcoin but here we are discussing how damaging would it be to sell it to someone else.

In an ideal world, releasing the bitcoincore code on bitcoin.org or sdfsdfsdfsd.io shouldn't make a difference for bitcoin... but it does.

[Wind_FURY]

Selling bitcoin.org to Roger Ver or any other people claiming to be Satoshi would be a tragedy, and a complete disaster for Bitcoin.

BCH and BSV have damaged Bitcoin and its image, slowed down its adoption and massively increased the confusion about it.

Giving bitcoin.org to these guys could simply kill Bitcoin.

If you don't want to update bitcoin.org anymore, just leave it dormant: a single page explaining what Bitcoin is, with a link to the original Satoshi PDF paper.

But don't sell this domain. Please, just don't.

Giving bitcoin.org to Roger Ver would create a social attack on Bitcoin.

If bitcoin can be killed like this (by social attacks), it didn't deserve to live in the first place.

It can't be killed, but the community shouldn't take it by doing nothing. Would you like Roger Ver to own bitcoin.org as a political attack-tool, and as a tool to scam newbies?

I thought there was no official web page for bitcoin but here we are discussing how damaging would it be to sell it to someone else.

It WILL be damaging if sold to the wrong person. Go to bitcoin.com, click "Buy Bitcoin". What is it selling?

In an ideal world, releasing the bitcoincore code on bitcoin.org or sdfsdfsdfsd.io shouldn't make a difference for bitcoin... but it does.

It does because bitcoin.org has been a Bitcoin website for many years. Changing it into a fraudulent forked shitcoin website to scam people is not ideal in a non-ideal world.

[DarkDays]

I wouldn't be surprised if Craig Wright doesn't manage to get his hands on the domain after it gets handed over.

After all, he could secretly reach out to all the major candidates and offer them a large sum to part ways with the domain if they're selected. So long as this agreement is made under an NDA, Wright really doesn't have much to lose.

I'm sure he would keep it 100% under the radar anyway even if he did get it, but maybe this could be part of his myriad tactics to delegitimize or attack Bitcoin.

Then again, Wright has proven himself to be all mouth and no action. He's threatened to reveal critical flaws in Bitcoin and dump the market numerous times now, so I doubt he actually intends to do harm to the network.

[JayJuanGee]

Selling bitcoin.org to Roger Ver or any other people claiming to be Satoshi would be a tragedy, and a complete disaster for Bitcoin.

BCH and BSV have damaged Bitcoin and its image, slowed down its adoption and massively increased the confusion about it.

Giving bitcoin.org to these guys could simply kill Bitcoin.

If you don't want to update bitcoin.org anymore, just leave it dormant: a single page explaining what Bitcoin is, with a link to the original Satoshi PDF paper.

But don't sell this domain. Please, just don't.

Giving bitcoin.org to Roger Ver would create a social attack on Bitcoin.

If bitcoin can be killed like this (by social attacks), it didn't deserve to live in the first place.

It can't be killed, but the community shouldn't take it by doing nothing. Would you like Roger Ver to own bitcoin.org as a political attack-tool, and as a tool to scam newbies?

I thought there was no official web page for bitcoin but here we are discussing how damaging would it be to sell it to someone else.

It WILL be damaging if sold to the wrong person. Go to bitcoin.com, click "Buy Bitcoin". What is it selling?

In an ideal world, releasing the bitcoincore code on bitcoin.org or sdfsdfsdfsd.io shouldn't make a difference for bitcoin... but it does.

It does because bitcoin.org has been a Bitcoin website for many years. Changing it into a fraudulent forked shitcoin website to scam people is not ideal in a non-ideal world.

Of course, bitcoin is going to survive either way, and seems that Cøbra is considering various possibilities, and of course, if Roger has already shown himself to be a scammer and an attack vector on bitcoin, then selling or transferring to him would likely end up having the site used for scamming and attacking bitcoin... which does not seem to be the direction that Cøbra would like to go - even if Roger were to be the highest bidder. 

Has anyone heard any updates from Cøbra, recently, on this subject matter?  Has a short-list developed?  Maybe there has been some behind the scenes vetting?

[gentlemand]

In an ideal world, releasing the bitcoincore code on bitcoin.org or sdfsdfsdfsd.io shouldn't make a difference for bitcoin... but it does.

We haven't seen it tested so there's no way of knowing. I'd say a fully Ver-ified .org would be misleading and unhelpful but wouldn't have much effect in the great scheme of things. The main thing it would do is enrage newbies and turn them against what he's attempting to push. A compromised bitcoin.org doesn't mean anything when every exchange, broker, website and bit of press deals with the real thing.

If your welcome to Roger's world is him sliding his scaly penis up you you're not going to develop warm feelings.

Bitcoin.com is a significant property too. BCH is still in the toilet price and penetration wise compared to the past. You can have an initial effect with things like that but it won't sustain if it's empty.

[Karartma1]

There are a few things that shouldn't happen in the real world, one being to not let R ver have that domain.

[BitcoinFX]

@Cøbra (others?)

Wakey wakey!

Notification - Kindly fix up your Lets Encrypt SSL Certificate ... it is currently capped to a grade B ...

- https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=bitcoin.org&hideResults=on

SSL Labs Grade Change for TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1 Protocols ...
- https://blog.qualys.com/ssllabs/2018/11/19/grade-change-for-tls-1-0-and-tls-1-1-protocols

Has insecure cypher suites ...
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cipher_suite

Is therefore vulnerable to the BEAST attack ...
- https://blog.qualys.com/ssllabs/2013/09/10/is-beast-still-a-threat

Your also using an RSA 2048 bits publickey certificate despite Lets Encrypt supporting RSA 4096 bits publickey certificates, out-of-the box ...

...

How to Guide ...

See: https://ssl-config.mozilla.org/

Example;

Code:

# generated 2020-06-18, Mozilla Guideline v5.4, nginx 1.17.7, OpenSSL 1.1.1d, intermediate configuration
# https://ssl-config.mozilla.org/#server=nginx&version=1.17.7&config=intermediate&openssl=1.1.1d&guideline=5.4
server {
    listen 80 default_server;
    listen [::]:80 default_server;

    return 301 https://$host$request_uri;
}

server {
    listen 443 ssl http2;
    listen [::]:443 ssl http2;

    ssl_certificate /path/to/signed_cert_plus_intermediates;
    ssl_certificate_key /path/to/private_key;
    ssl_session_timeout 1d;
    ssl_session_cache shared:MozSSL:10m;  # about 40000 sessions
    ssl_session_tickets off;

    # curl https://ssl-config.mozilla.org/ffdhe2048.txt > /path/to/dhparam
    ssl_dhparam /path/to/dhparam;

    # intermediate configuration
    ssl_protocols TLSv1.2 TLSv1.3;
    ssl_ciphers ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305:ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305:DHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
    ssl_prefer_server_ciphers off;

    # HSTS (ngx_http_headers_module is required) (63072000 seconds)
    add_header Strict-Transport-Security "max-age=63072000" always;

    # OCSP stapling
    ssl_stapling on;
    ssl_stapling_verify on;

    # verify chain of trust of OCSP response using Root CA and Intermediate certs
    ssl_trusted_certificate /path/to/root_CA_cert_plus_intermediates;

    # replace with the IP address of your resolver
    resolver 127.0.0.1;
}

You need to update the # intermediate configuration ssl_protocols and ssl_ciphers .

Then use certbot to upgrade your certificate publickey to RSA 4096 bit

Code:

sudo certbot --nginx -d bitcoin.org -d www.bitcoin.org --rsa-key-size 4096

Cheers!  

EDIT: also bitcointalk.org ...
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5196603.msg54643075#msg54643075