Topic: Hoaxtoshi aka Craig Wright busted - collection of quality research posts - page 4. (Read 5449 times)

Your ideas about facts are far removed from the rest of the world and are again off-topic (so I am not going to waste my time bothering to refute such off-topic snide remarks from you).

Here's another worthwhile article if it hasn't been mentioned before:

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/technical-proof-craig-wright-not-satoshi-nakamoto/

Idiot is factual in this context, as evident by your inability to refute my refutation.

The only idiot here is you - and I'm glad you keep on posting your belief in this CW guy as it is just going to make you look even more idiotic as it pans out that he is the fraud that he is.

He is playing a game with idiots like you.

And you really believe that the double hash of some Sartre document just happens to be identical to the hash of the first (or one of the first) txs in the blockchain?

Am guessing you have a very strong belief in the tooth fairy as well.

You don't know that he didn't. He hasn't yet revealed which portion of the Sartre text he claims hashes to the same hash. That was the point of the thread I created which Gmaxwell has apparently sent to the ether (against forum rules).

He never used the hash of any Sartre quote (that was just misdirection) - the double hash that he used was simply that used in Satoshi's tx along with the signature that was used in the tx.

(basically he just copied and pasted from the blockchain then put together an elaborate pretense that he had somehow managed to sign something else using a private key known to belong to Satoshi)

Can someone explain how he signed the 'Satre' quote WITHOUT having to break SHA256 (finding a collision) ?

It's pretty important, as if he did do that, Bitcoin is broken.

Is he going to show up here to give a formal apology to the bitcoin community for his lying and deceit for trying to masquerade around as bitcoins creator and founder?
He should give every forum member 0.1btc for us enduring this traumatic situation.

The tweets of this account might be worth reading.

As /u/winlifeat posted here, Craig was user 'e62d5e53-0dbc-44be-9591-725cd55ca9dd' at the Mtgox exchange. With this identifier, it's possible to look up his trades in the 2014 leak. I posted the raw data in this pastebin, you can import it into spreadsheet software like Excel to play with it yourself.
He started trading at 22/04/2013, this is just after the crash of the April 2013 bubble (or the 'Cyprus bubble'). He lost interest pretty quickly, because activity stopped 27/04, only to come back 25/11 around the peak of the last bitcoin bubble. His average price is actually $120 and he bought around 50 bitcoins, but his last buy was 17 bitcoins at around $1200. He ends up with a balance of just under 15 bitcoins when mtgox shuts down, so he probably lost another few bitcoins with trading. (The trade data in the leak stops at November 2013)

i cannot believe there are dumb people enough to believe this crap, but apparently there are.

soon he will prove to us that he was a day 1 miner.

SOON!
as soon as he supercomputer finds a hash-sig-thingy that matches an early TX

The tweets of this account might be worth reading.

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:


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.

Is he going to show up here to give a formal apology to the bitcoin community for his lying and deceit for trying to masquerade around as bitcoins creator and founder?
He should give every forum member 0.1btc for us enduring this traumatic situation.

I wonder if Gavin's commit access will be permanently revoked? Do people honestly believe he wasn't in cahoots with Wright?