5 ms·
Hal Finney passed away in 2014. But the address has been active since: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1Q2TWHE3GMdB6BZKafqwxXtWAWgFt5Jvm3 https://www.bl
by retrac 4y ago
Hal Finney passed away in 2014. But the address has been active since: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1Q2TWHE3GMdB6BZKafqwxXtWAWgFt5Jvm3 https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1Q2TWHE3GMdB6BZKafqwx...
I see four possibilities:
* An absurdly elaborate conspiracy. (This is always a possibility.)
* Ghosts can do cryptography.
* ECDSA is cracked.
* Someone else has a copy Finney's key.
Occam's razor: spectral signatures!
- nkzd 4y agoI am not sure I understand, how could this be a conspiracy?
- retrac 4y agoSorry, I was being somewhat sarcastic and it misfired. The only real option is the last one. The key is most likely compromised.
- stainablesteel 4y agoits plausibly debatable someone who isnt paul le roux left their signature saying it was paul le roux, in case it ends up being read one day
- ratg13 4y agoThis message was signed with Hal’s key.. we know someone has control over his key after his death and has used it. (1) who has Hal’s key (2) where did Martin “find” this message to be able to decrypt it There’s obviously some sort of agenda here involving multiple people, it’s just not clear at the moment what this particular agenda is.
- retrac 4y agoOof. Apparently my irreverent tone was not well-received. I'll be more sober about it. A cryptographic hash is not proof that data was signed by a particular individual, unless you know for certain that individual is the only person who has the key. That is a hard standard to meet with a dead man when the key has demonstrably been used after his death. That transaction in 2017 means that someone besides Finney simply must know Finney's key. Anything signed by this key cannot be trusted to have come from Finney.
- bmitc 4y agoKeys are just keys and are not tied to a person’s identity. When can they ever be trusted to come from a single person?