The NYT investigation concluded that British cryptographer Adam Back may be behind the Satoshi Nakamoto pseudonym.
The New York Times published an investigation claiming that British cryptographer Adam Back, the inventor of Hashcash, is the most likely candidate for Satoshi Nakamoto — the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin.
Related: Bitcoin Mining Hashrate Falls 5.8% as Older Rigs Shut Down
Investigative journalist John Carreyrou conducted a year-long analysis of thousands of old cypherpunk mailing list posts, court documents, and correspondence. He concluded that writing style, technical phrasing, and timing all point to Back.
Investigation’s Arguments
The authors note that Back described key ideas between 1997 and 1999 that later became the foundation of Bitcoin (BTC). These included:
- Fully decentralized electronic cash
- Privacy protection
- A proof-of-work mechanism
- Solving the Byzantine Generals problem
He also referenced Wei Dai’s b-money and proposed using Hashcash to create digital coins. Both works were cited in the Bitcoin white paper.
Related: How Bitcoin ATMs Work and Where to Find Them
Additionally, the investigation points to linguistic matches. British spelling, specific hyphenation patterns, and rare terms appear in both Back’s and Satoshi’s writings.
After the white paper’s publication, Back temporarily “disappeared” from public discussion. He became actively involved again in 2013 when he founded Blockstream.
Adam Back’s Reaction
Adam Back categorically denied the New York Times claims. In a post on X, he stated:
“i’m not satoshi, but I was early in laser focus on the positive societal implications of cryptography, online privacy and electronic cash, hence my ~1992 onwards active interest in applied research on ecash, privacy tech on cypherpunks list which led to hashcash and other ideas.”
Back has previously denied being Bitcoin’s creator on multiple occasions, including in response to an HBO documentary that named Peter Todd as the primary suspect.
The crypto community has largely reacted skeptically to the new theory. Many experts, including Jameson Lopp, believe stylistic analysis cannot serve as reliable proof.
The only indisputable confirmation would be a cryptographic signature using Satoshi’s private key.
Related: Bitcoin Quantum Risk Is ‘More Social Than Technical,’ Grayscale Says
