Unexpected Ways in which Bitcoin Dodged Some Cryptographic Bullets
Who created Bitcoin?<p>This comment seems to offer many clues: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5547590" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5547590</a><p><i>There are two groups that are on the suspects list for having engendered bitcoin, one group centers around Trinity College, another is a bunch of loosely affiliated international collaborators. Both groups are on the record with precursors to bitcoin (papers, software), neither has admitted openly that they were the ones.</i><p>Along with <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5548093" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5548093</a><p><i>Investigations into the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto have been attempted by The New Yorker and Fast Company. Fast Company's investigation brought up circumstantial evidence that indicated a link between an encryption patent application filed by Neal King, Vladimir Oksman and Charles Bry on 15 August 2008, and the bitcoin.org domain name which was registered 72 hours later. The patent application (#20100042841) contained networking and encryption technologies similar to bitcoin's. After textual analysis, the phrase "...computationally impractical to reverse" was found in both the patent application and bitcoin's whitepaper. All three inventors explicitly denied being Satoshi Nakamoto.</i><p>Anyone care to speculate whether it's more likely the creators were based in Trinity College rather than being international collaborators?<p>It's interesting that the controller of the Satoshi persona managed to stay anonymous for so long.  I wonder if they were careful to only write forum posts via Tor?  Otherwise their IP address might've been logged.  An IP address would be enough for an ISP to unmask them (or at least narrow down the suspect list quite a lot).  Satoshi also made a lot of source code commits, which seems like another way their IP address could leak.