Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto
EDIT 2: Debunked!<p>The signature in Wright's post is just pulled straight from a transaction on the blockchain. Convert the base64 signature from his post (MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VTC3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4=) to hex (3045022100c12a7d54972f26d14cb311339b5122f8c187417dde1e8efb6841f55c34220ae0022066632c5cd4161efa3a2837764eee9eb84975dd54c2de2865e9752585c53e7cce), and you get the signature found in this transaction input: <a href="https://blockchain.info/tx/828ef3b079f9c23829c56fe86e85b4a69d9e06e5b54ea597eef5fb3ffef509fe" rel="nofollow">https://blockchain.info/tx/828ef3b079f9c23829c56fe86e85b4a69...</a><p>Note that the base64 string at the top of his post isn't a signature, just  a cleartext message: " Wright, it is not the same as if I sign Craig Wright, Satoshi.\n\n".<p>Now the only question is how he fooled Gavin. I would imagine this story will still get spread around some naive channels for a while, just like the last time Wright tried something like this.<p>Credit goes to jouke in #bitcoin for figuring it out.<p>-----------------<p>EDIT: Current opinion: still skeptical. Here is the public cryptographic "proof": <a href="http://www.drcraigwright.net/jean-paul-sartre-signing-significance/" rel="nofollow">http://www.drcraigwright.net/jean-paul-sartre-signing-signif...</a><p>Something still seems off to me, why does he go into such specific detail in verifying the signature? I would have assumed he would just let people figure out the verification themselves. But maybe I'm just skeptical because Satoshi having a public identity takes some of the magic away.<p>As pointed out by maaku, he never revealed what message the signature is supposed to be signing.<p>-----------------<p>My Original Post:<p>Everyone in this thread is already taking this as the truth. But remember that Wright has not publicly released any cryptographic proof, there is only a claim from BBC that he showed the signature to them and a few magazines.<p>This strikes me as a little strange since originally Satoshi pretty much only interacted with the community via the bitcoin mailing list. Why did he "reveal" the proof by sending it to some magazines rather than emailing the mailing list?<p>It really seems like the person who created Bitcoin, a trustless system based on cryptographic proof, wouldn't make everyone take his word on his identity when it could be trivially solved with one email.