Why is Satoshi Nakamoto's PGP Key not currently on bitcoin.org ?

[Carlton Banks]

Not disputing that.  

Indeed that is why my list for accepting proof of the satoshi identity (cyrptographically) has five different points of empirical evidence.

well, Satoshi's key is in the repo for bitcoin.org: https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/blob/master/satoshinakamoto.asc

but not on the actual https://bitcoin.org website (maybe try to see if it's on the sitemap for bitcoin.org? I guess if it's in the repo, then the file _is_ somewhere on the website)


for historical purposes, isn't that enough? Satoshi doesn't work on Bitcoin now, so really that part of Bitcoin's story is just that: an old part of the story

[1715159365]

1715159365

[1715159365]

1715159365

[pooya87]

There's nothing wrong with doing it,

a bit OT but i wouldn't say nothing because there are a couple of things wrong with using a bitcoin address/key instead of a PGP key.
for starters a bitcoin address is a single-use token, in other words if reusing addresses is already wrong. secondly it requires a centralized database that links identities to addresses which goes against decentralized nature of bitcoin.
and finally this type of signatures make sense to prove ownership of funds not identity and with more complex scripts that we can have (multi-sig, locktime, conditionals, ...) it makes even less sense for identity while it could still be used as "proof of funds".

[abdulodoi]

I would say it's probably safer and expected that Satoshi's PGP keys are removed since it was added over a decade ago thus prone to potential takeover by hacker (there are more advanced and sophisticated coder who was/is probably working on getting control of the keys)

Imagine the damage it could do to bitcoin if someone shows up with those keys now.

[Carlton Banks]

There's nothing wrong with doing it,

a bit OT but i wouldn't say nothing because there are a couple of things wrong with using a bitcoin address/key instead of a PGP key.

yes, I agree with your reasons completely.

However, I think that the very fact that Bitcoin introduces people to the concept of signing messages with crypto keys is actually important. To put it another way: signing messages from Bitcoin addresses works, but it's far from ideal, PGP is far better for signing/encrypting (etc...) of messages for regular people. Proving who really owns the keys is more of a problem, but Bitcoin is even worse in that respect

[BitcoinFX]

Not disputing that.  

Indeed that is why my list for accepting proof of the satoshi identity (cyrptographically) has five different points of empirical evidence.

well, Satoshi's key is in the repo for bitcoin.org: https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/blob/master/satoshinakamoto.asc

but not on the actual https://bitcoin.org website (maybe try to see if it's on the sitemap for bitcoin.org? I guess if it's in the repo, then the file _is_ somewhere on the website)


for historical purposes, isn't that enough? Satoshi doesn't work on Bitcoin now, so really that part of Bitcoin's story is just that: an old part of the story

Again, the point is the PGP Key is NOT (currently) where satoshi left it.

The genuine Satoshi Nakamoto has a PGP Key, here:

For future reference, here's my public key.  It's the same one that's been there since the bitcoin.org site first went up in 2008.  Grab it now in case you need it later.

http://www.bitcoin.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=458.msg5772#msg5772

...snip...

You know that satoshi does not work on Bitcoin still as a matter of fact do you?

It is entirely unacceptable and despicable that this PGP Key was ever 'removed' from bitcoin.org

Folks like Craig Wright are actively trying to re-write a fake historical narrative of Bitcoin creation ...

- hxxps://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/satoshi-never-posted-on-bitcointalk/

Bitcoin is not a story. It is a hard reality. Fact.

Do you not choose cryptographically assured proof over and above a story?

That is all.

[Ucy]

the source code still contains the key[1] while the site seems to not have any link to make it accessible publicly.
maybe bitcoin.org needs a "historical" page that can include this key alongside other historical facts and clarify that this key was created 12 years ago and may not be safe anymore. although i don't think there is anything insecure about a 1024-bit DSA key.

[1] https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/blob/master/satoshinakamoto.asc (permanent)

Exactly.
Things of that nature is of historic value and should be kind of immutable and transparent.

 Couple posters above made some interesting points why it's good to remove the keys... I think people should still be able to see the archive records of the changes though.

The very same PGP Key is also located on the Web Archive page for bitcoin.org :

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

Anybody who loves bitcoin should be thrilled to read the above archive page. The very first content that was put into http://bitcoin.org by satoshi.

Just read archived page. It's actually still really nice and solid.

[Eurekko]

Hello, I am very interested on that post. I will try to explain what i remember. And I need help of very experimented user of that forum. I don’t lie. I am ont a rober. I got the proof about what i said. I just want to have the  final word of that story. Please explain me un detail. With clear sentences and kindness.
The story began un 2009, between january and arrond june. Earlier january i sas very interrested by bitcoin concept. When it came in production i wanted to by it, but someone told me that it Would be easier to create it. Si i downloaded the program but i had a pb to make it run correctly. I think a pb of port something like that. I what un contact with a person. He wanted to communicate with a coding system using igoldier (something like that)( i don’t remember i think is name was stephen, but i am not sure ).
We had pb to configure the machine so he managed to localise my IP adress between others using queries in Google Map. I have already the Mime file and the ip’s Adresses i have noted. I letted my computer turn on during days ( i don’t remember how much Time but more than weeks). Then i received a « gift »componed by some files.
I recently remember that story. I can see un thoses files some RSA keys and some files that i don’t know how to use it. What i remember is that i had to stock it outside of internet on a usb key. I think thoses files never touch internet since.

I have also buyed some btc in 2010. (It was some zip files, that i didn’t know how to use)
Could someone explain me what to do with my rsa keys please?) thanks

[BitcoinFX]

Isn't Satoshi's mail hacked? satoshin@gmx.com

See topic: satoshin@gmx.com is compromised
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=775174.0

and with regards to the PGP Key here is why a Signed message should still be considered as one empirical source of evidence as 'proof' of satoshi ...

...snip...

As far as I know, the PGP key has never been signed or in fact been used to sign anything, whatsoever.

This indicates to me that the Key is still to be 'trusted'.

The GMX email service did not incorporate encryption in the web service back then.

So, in all likely hood this PGP key was generated on the very same machine that satoshi used to build and compile early Bitcoin (BTC) wallet releases.

[BitcoinFX]

Sorry,when this pgp key removed? it s new?

No it is not new.

Last bitcoin.org snapshot with the PGP Key August 16th 2011
- https://web.archive.org/web/20110816103711/http://www.bitcoin.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

First bitcoin.org snapshot without the PGP Key September 11th 2014
- https://web.archive.org/web/20140911014743/http://www.bitcoin.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

So, somewhere between August 16th 2011 and September 11th 2014 the Key was removed from the server.

Other sources of evidence will likely show us by whom and perhaps why they saw fit to remove it.

[Eurekko]

Hello bitcoinFX,
I don’t know if CWS is satoshi. But Craig Wright gived some details about end 2008 and ealier 2009 that i didn’t see somewhere else. I remember some details that i Wanted to match with all the writing in bitcoin and i found only is version which is closest to what i remember.

So i you have more detail about that period it would be greate to share it here.

[BitcoinFX]

Hello bitcoinFX,
I don’t know if CWS is satoshi. But Craig Wright gived some details about end 2008 and ealier 2009 that i didn’t see somewhere else. I remember some details that i Wanted to match with all the writing in bitcoin and i found only is version which is closest to what i remember.

So i you have more detail about that period it would be greate to share it here.

Craig Wright is NOT satoshi nakamoto.

He has not provided any valid cryptographically assured proof, to-date, whatsoever.

He has attempted to falsify cryptographic 'proof' (and other documents) and failed, in a court of law ...

"The Faketoshi Fifteen (Times Two)
Craig Wright’s most epic lies, frauds and forgeries 2013 — 2020"
- https://medium.com/coinmonks/the-faketoshi-fifteen-times-two-76e8060905b4

- https://seekingsatoshi.weebly.com/fraud-timeline.html

...


- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1317195157851279360

...


- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1317203553367318528

...

"Imagine thinking that only Judges can figure this out.

Imagine thinking that Craig Wright would only do this INSIDE a court room. "


- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1318462839233925120

No further questions your honor !

[Eurekko]

Excuse me bitcoinFX, i don’t Wanted to offense you. I have no bad intentions and i respect you.
To be honest what i am searching is my past. So i search on the net old  stories about bitcoins. And i recently read about CWS.
I search only search a living person who known the storie, who participare to build the story.
Because i did not found someone who where there earlier 2009.
I am on this forum because i need help to recover.
So if you where there , if you know the story, help me please.
Has i have already said i am not a rober. And only someone who know will be able to proof it.

[cosnes]

Craig Wright is NOT satoshi nakamoto.

Is there any information from the SEC about this?

[BitcoinFX]

"@CobraBitcoin
 
"Why is Satoshi Nakamoto's PGP Key not currently on http://bitcoin.org ?"

- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5284596.0 "

- https://twitter.com/BitcoinFX_XBT/status/1333363320150175748

[AB de Royse777]

Retweeted. Hopefully there will be some response.

[BitcoinFX]

Retweeted. Hopefully there will be some response.

Indeed ...

"It's still on the server, just been renamed: http://bitcoin.org/satoshinakamoto.asc "
- https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/1333447873799856129

 

...

"Well perhaps you might kindly rename it back to Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc for historical reference;

- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=458.msg5772#msg5772 "
- https://twitter.com/BitcoinFX_XBT/status/1336623022904578055

 

[Carlton Banks]

@BitcoinFX

you do realize that whether the filename is "satoshinakamoto.asc" or "satoshi_nakomoto.asc" makes precisely zero difference to if the key works or not?


you're _literally_ arguing about "what color to paint the bikeshed" here

[BitcoinFX]

@BitcoinFX

you do realize that whether the filename is "satoshinakamoto.asc" or "satoshi_nakomoto.asc" makes precisely zero difference to if the key works or not?


you're _literally_ arguing about "what color to paint the bikeshed" here

@Carlton Banks

Of course I do.

You do realize that satoshi placed his PGP key at bitcoin.org and named it Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc and not satoshinakamoto.asc ?

Do you fail to understand the historical importance and relevance here ?

...

So, currently ...

- http://www.bitcoin.org/satoshinakamoto.asc (the historically incorrect link will download the key)

whilst

- http://www.bitcoin.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc (the historically correct link will not download the key)

...

For future reference, here's my public key.  It's the same one that's been there since the bitcoin.org site first went up in 2008.  Grab it now in case you need it later.

http://www.bitcoin.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

...

When we have the likes of CSW merging some historical facts with total fiction in blog posts like this one, ...
- hxxps://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/satoshi-never-posted-on-bitcointalk/

whilst persisting on making claims to the satoshi identity in a court of law and yet without presenting any valid cryptographically assured proof to date whatsoever, then these historical artifacts are very relevant and important, if not perhaps being critically relevant to any outcome.

So no, I'm not literally arguing "about "what color to paint the bikeshed" here" ... am I.

Not your keys; Not your coins!

[BitcoinFX]

One day, perhaps sometime soon, people will head some of the things I ramble on about ...

"Regarding CSW and the Bitcoin Whitepaper"
- https://bitcoin.org/en/posts/regarding-csw

Yesterday both Bitcoin.org and Bitcoincore.org received allegations of copyright infringement of the Bitcoin whitepaper by lawyers representing Craig Steven Wright. In this letter, they claim Craig owns the copyright to the paper, the Bitcoin name, and ownership of bitcoin.org. They also claim he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, and the original owner of bitcoin.org. Bitcoin.org and Bitcoincore.org were both asked to take down the whitepaper. We believe these claims are without merit, and refuse to do so.

Unfortunately, without consulting us, Bitcoin Core developers scrambled to remove the Bitcoin whitepaper from bitcoincore.org, in response to these allegations of copyright infringement, lending credence to these false claims. The Bitcoin Core website was modified to remove references to the whitepaper, their local copy of the whitepaper PDF was deleted, and with less than 2 hours of public review, this change was merged. By surrendering in this way, the Bitcoin Core project has lent ammunition to Bitcoin’s enemies, engaged in self-censorship, and compromised its integrity. This surrender will no doubt be weaponized to make new false claims, like that the Bitcoin Core developers “know” CSW to be Satoshi Nakamoto and this is why they acted in this way.

The Bitcoin whitepaper was included in the original Bitcoin project files with the project clearly published under the MIT license by Satoshi Nakamoto. We believe there is no doubt we have the legal right to host the Bitcoin whitepaper. Furthermore, Satoshi Nakamoto has a known PGP public key, therefore it is cryptographically possible for someone to verify themselves to be Satoshi Nakamoto. Unfortunately, Craig has been unable to do this.

We will continue hosting the Bitcoin whitepaper and won’t be silenced or intimidated. Others hosting the whitepaper should follow our lead in resisting these false allegations.

Posted to the Bitcoin.org Site Blog on 21 January 2021 by Cøbra

EDIT: Updated (additional): 22nd January 2021

Here is CSW talking about the known 'satoshi' PGP public key ...

1. The Original Website - Satoshi Nakamoto - Dr. Craig S. Wright & Ryan X. Charles. - Jan 4, 2021
- https://youtu.be/_E7iuVM4CIA?t=5140

He is trying to claim that the satoshi PGP key linked at the base of the page was supposedly changed by core devs who later controlled bitcoin.org

- https://web.archive.org/web/20090131115053/http://bitcoin.org/ - Earliest snapshot 31st Jan, 2010

He is asserting that because the earliest snapshot in the web archive of the very same known PGP is from 28th Feb, 2011 that it is not his PGP key.

- https://web.archive.org/web/20110228054007/http://www.bitcoin.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

 

See the OP.

- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5284596.0

Does Craig Wright not actually understand how PGP and cryptography works ? He most certainly does not understand how identity works in Bitcoin.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with robots.txt 'hiding' information. A false claim.

The known satoshi PGP Key (timestamped 2008) is signed with the email address in the f*cking whitepaper, which he is currently trying (and failing) to claim ownership of.

...

So, where is Craig's own copy of his 'Satoshi Nakamoto' PGP Key then ? A 'PGP Key' was most certainly present on the website he claims to be his !

How about a signed message of proof ?  

"A catch-22 is a paradoxical situation from which an individual cannot escape because of contradictory rules or limitations."
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)

Not your PGP key; Not your whitepaper; Not your domain name.

...

"No they have not.

Earliest http://bitcoin.org snapshot Jan 31st 2009 ...

- https://web.archive.org/web/20090131115053/http://bitcoin.org/

Scroll to the base of the page and click the PGP Key link ...

"Satoshi Nakamoto
satoshin @ gmx .com
PGP key"

It's the same PGP key."
- https://twitter.com/BitcoinFX_XBT/status/1352252043239555074

...

"It does not matter what you try to assert.

The PGP key in question belongs to the real Satoshi Nakamoto.

I saved a copy of the original PGP Key in 2010.

This is me ...
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5.msg188#msg188

I will testify to the above."
- https://twitter.com/BitcoinFX_XBT/status/1352253734865285124


*Satire*
Team America: World Police (10/10) Movie CLIP - Dicks, Pussies and Assholes (2004) HD *NSFW*
- https://youtu.be/32iCWzpDpKs

[Daltonik]

The High Court of London ruled in favor of the self-proclaimed creator of bitcoin Craig Wright in the case against the owner of the site Bitcoin.org under the pseudonym Cobra. According to the notice, on June 28, the judge banned the defendant from violating Wright's copyright in the UK "as by providing the opportunity to download white paper from the website Bitcoin.org, and in any other way". https://www.ontier.digital/post/uk-court-awards-bitcoin-creator-default-judgment-in-bitcoin-copyright-infringement-claim

Cobra must post a copy of the decision on its website within six months.
Cobra commented on the court's decision on his Twitter with an offer to pay Craig his costs in the case of the bitcoin white paper by paying in BTC to the address associated with block #9