The Craig Wright Bitcoin Suit Is Baseless, According to Security Researcher

The Craig Wright Bitcoin Suit Is Baseless, According to Security Researcher

Bitcoin security investigation collective WizSec calls evidence presented in the $10 billion USD lawsuit filed against Craig Wright, a man who claims to be the author of the Bitcoin whitepaper, “clumsy document backdating.”

Also see: Apple Co-Founder Steve Wozniak’s ‘Bitcoin Theft’ Story Is Just Credit Card Fraud

Join the Bitsonline Telegram channel to get the latest Bitcoin, cryptocurrency, and tech news updates: https://t.me/bitsonline

Not So Fast?

The massive lawsuit, filed a few days ago, claims Craig Wright fraudulently acquired hundreds of thousands of bitcoins from addresses owned by the late Dave Kleiman, another figure commonly speculated to be Satoshi Nakamoto.

As much as the high drama of a billion dollar confidence scheme has legs, the evidence presented to substantiate that drama probably doesn’t.

That’s per Kim Nilsson, known for his Mt. Gox research and author of the lawsuit analysis in question. Nilsson purports that neither Kleiman nor Wright owned any of the bitcoin presented as evidence of fraud. Nilsson’s research attributes most of the addresses to Mt. Gox, and their internal transactions:

Bitcoin
Nilsson’s illustrative graph.

Some of the addresses referenced in the suit didn’t even exist or have a balance when the fraud was supposed to have taken place, and others are previously known Mt. Gox cold storage sites — weakening the premises that the suit is based upon.

Nilsson: Wright Had Mt. Gox Account, But Unrelated

Nilsson goes on to argue that Wright had a Mt. Gox Account, and that it had nothing to do with any of the named transactions listed in the lawsuit. He concludes the article on an incredulous note:

“This isn’t some grand conspiracy of having stolen a million bitcoins, it’s some guy browsing a ‘blockchain rich list,’ picking out a couple of addresses at random and saying ‘I own those’ for whatever reasons, while offering no evidence except for some clumsy document backdating. These claims would never have gotten past an actual specialist.”

As big a story as the lawsuit might have been, it’s important to step back and realize how easily the space propagates misinformation.

I don’t dare speculate as to what the thought process behind the suit might be, but the fact that it is an extremely easy story to trade on raises some big red flags.

What’s your take? Do you think this Kleiman lawsuit is sketchy? Sound off in the comments below.


Images via Wiz Sec, Engadget

Related News