Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The CIA 'Can Neither Confirm Nor Deny' It Has Documents on Satoshi Nakamoto (vice.com)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the never-ending-mysteries dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? Ever since this pseudonymous person or group unleashed Bitcoin on the world in 2008, Nakamoto's real identity has been one of the biggest mysteries in the cryptocurrency world. And based on a response to my recent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, if the CIA knows anything, it's not talking. [...] In 2016, Alexander Muse, a blogger who mostly writes about entrepreneurship, wrote a blog post that claimed the NSA had identified the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto using stylometry, which uses a person's writing style as a unique fingerprint, and then searched emails collected under the PRISM surveillance program to identify the real Nakamoto. Muse said the identity was not shared with him by his source at the Department of Homeland Security. [...] I figured it couldn't hurt to ask some other three-letter agencies what they know about Nakamoto. [...] I received a terse reply that informed me that "the request has been rejected, with the agency stating that it can neither confirm nor deny the existence of the requested documents."

34 of 66 comments (clear)

  1. Standard party line... by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you ask then if the world is flat or if UFO's exist, you will get the same answer. It's the standard party line for any questions of substance.

    The whole point of this is to not provide any information, including information about the existence or non-existence of information. So this answer means literally nothing....

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:Standard party line... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      They won't even admit their Twitter account's first tweet came from them...

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Standard party line... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah this article is completely meaningless. "BREAKING NEWS: Nothing!"
      I guess that's not too different from the majority of "news" I see though.

      "You won't believe what happened next!"....

    3. Re:Standard party line... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      If you ask then if the world is flat or if UFO's exist, you will get the same answer.

      They do actually answer if the world is flat. They publish maps of and general facts about countries/territories/areas. Think census/atlas level information. It's mostly so they don't have to keep responding to other government agencies for non-classified things (I guess there's a regulation to use CIA data for some reports/purposes).

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  2. CIA or NSA by gavron · · Score: 1

    The NSA has uncovered Satoshi... so the FOIA request should have gone to them.
    Why send it to an unrelated agency?

    E

  3. but they have by slashmydots · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Except that they do and they already did confirm it. They analyzed all his writing and compared it to all public posts on online forums etc and found out who he is. This information was already made public.

    1. Re:but they have by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Yes, as it turns out MsMash is really Satoshi Nakamoto.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:but they have by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Yep. Unfortunately, it turns out he's D. B. Cooper.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    3. Re:but they have by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite · · Score: 3, Informative

      Except that they do and they already did confirm it. They analyzed all his writing and compared it to all public posts on online forums etc and found out who he is. This information was already made public.

      Care to provide a link?

      What I remember is a similar story but it was a journalist who claimed that a DHS source told him that the NSA had identified Satoshi with a "fingerprint" of the texts.
      Link to slashdot story: https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...

    4. Re:but they have by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure the pseudonym is a group of individuals. The posting of original documents happened at all hours and not a pattern typical of a single person.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    5. Re:but they have by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure the pseudonym is a group of individuals. The posting of original documents happened at all hours and not a pattern typical of a single person.

      I believe "fingerprinting" techniques at least similar to the one the NSA is said to have used have been published, so if there is enough text available your hypothesis might be verifiable by iterating over selected groups of the texts.

  4. This is silly by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    And if you were to file a FOIA request, asking the CIA if they had any documents related to Daniel Oberhaus (the author of this silly story) - you would get the exact same response.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:This is silly by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Chalk this up to some millenial wasting taxpayers money so we could write something in his blog.

    2. Re:This is silly by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      And if you were to file a FOIA request, asking the CIA if they had any documents related to Daniel Oberhaus (the author of this silly story) - you would get the exact same response.

      One would hope this incident would be in the file even if nothing else was.

    3. Re:This is silly by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The reason they neither confirm or deny everything is because it makes everything equally uncertain. If they only said it about things they wanted to keep secret then that would reveal what they want to keep secret.

    4. Re:This is silly by oh-dark-thirty · · Score: 1

      That is the same response I received when I filed a request for my own data, which is all they will ever say about anyone.

  5. killed by geekymachoman · · Score: 1

    Probably "neutralized" him already...

    For their corporate/bank bosses.

  6. Re:Standard Republican party line... by bobbied · · Score: 1

    "Collusion isn't even illegal, so what if he colluded?"

    Some kinds of collusion is most certainly illegal... But the illegal versions of this activity usually involves having competitors discussing how to price their products amongst themselves in an effort to avoid having to compete or agreeing to some legal action in order to take advantage of a third party. At most other times, the crime called conspiracy is what most folks are talking about when they discuss collusion.

    Collusion (private agreements between parties unknown to a third) are actually common and legal in many situations. Often this is true for commissioned sales and many service industries. One that may surprise you is Health Insurance, where the agreements between your insurance company and your doctor are not yours to see.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  7. I am by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I am Satoshi Nakamoto.

    1. Re:I am by quenda · · Score: 1

      I am Satoshi Nakamoto!

    2. Re:I am by johnsie · · Score: 1

      I am Satoshi Nakamoto.

    3. Re: I am by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Will the real Satoshi Nakamoto please stand up?

  8. I hate this phrase. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

    ... can neither confirm nor deny ...

    Of course they *can*, but they *won't*.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:I hate this phrase. by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      ... can neither confirm nor deny ...

      Of course they *can*, but they *won't*.

      Would you prefer, "well, we could tell you, but then we'd have to shoot you"???

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    2. Re:I hate this phrase. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, they can't. They're prohibited by law from doing so. The reason was likely for one or more of the following exemptions.
      Exemption 1: classified national defense and foreign relations information
      Exemption 2: internal agency rules and practices
      Exemption 3: information that is prohibited from disclosure by another federal
      law
      Exemption 4: trade secrets and other confidential business information
      Exemption 5:inter-agency or intra-agency communications that are protected by
      legal privileges
      Exemption 6: information involving matters of personal privacy
      Exemption 7:records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, to
      the extent that the production of those records (A) could reasonably be expected
      to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person of a right
      to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, (C) could reasonably be expected to
      constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be
      expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, (E) would disclose
      techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or
      would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or
      (F) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any
      individual
      Exemption 8: information relating to the supervision of financial institutions
      Exemption 9:geological information on wells

  9. I confirm and deny I am santoshi by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    I am Spartacus. I am batman. But my secret identity is Santoshi

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:I confirm and deny I am santoshi by q_e_t · · Score: 1

      I am Spartacus. I am batman.

      I am the walrus co-co-cachoo

  10. Re:Insider Trading by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

    And if they know who he is - what can they do about him? Especially if he didn't commit a crime.

    Sometimes you just know stuff that you don't know what to do with but you don't want to reveal what you know because one day you may need it.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  11. Stupid Article by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    The CIA would respond the same way no matter who this FOIA was requested for. Why is this even here?

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  12. not THE Satoshi Nakamoto by OutOnARock · · Score: 1

    It's "A" Satoshi Nakamoto

    "A", "S", "N"

    backwards: N S A

    spooky

  13. Re: Standard Republican party line... by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

    /. shitposting has gotten so stale over the years.

    --
    On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
  14. Plot twist... by jroysdon · · Score: 1

    Plot twist: Satoshi Nakamoto is really the CIA, the same as all major TOR nodes. Yup, totally anonymous, no one knows who you are or what you're doing.

  15. Re:Central Intelligence by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    satoshi: intelligence, knowledge, widsom, smart
    naka: center, middle
    moto: origin, root

    Nice one.

  16. Just satisfying their own curiosity? by John+Jorsett · · Score: 1

    I've noticed that whatever the spy agencies like the CIA and NSA come up with, it appears to be Write Only information. Nobody else in government seems to be able to get any of their work product. For example, presumably they collected Hillary's emails, just like they have everyone else's, yet when she claimed to have destroyed all the "personal" ones, nobody said, "Hey, let's see if the NSA has them".