Satoshi Nakamoto or Wei Dai ,who wrote SHA256

Author: Weisha Zhu

Wu: It seems that I can only study in this section.

Ask any questions at any time。

This analysis is a bit boring. Document (1) is Satoshi Nakamoto answering questions from users on the Bitcoin forum.

"If you can find SHA256 code that's faster (with MinGW/GCC) than what we've got, that would be really great! (although, keep licensing in mind)  The one we have is the only one I tried, so there's significant chance for improvement".

SHA256 is a basic encryption algorithm adopted by the Bitcoin system. It is what Satoshi Nakamoto said in reply to a volunteer developer.

There is nothing wrong with this sentence; only the use of "we" in the sentence "the one we have" is very Chinese. In terms of usage, the usage of "we" is very similar to my habit. Many studies have found that Satoshi Nakamoto has a British accent based on his English habits. In fact, after reading it, I think Satoshi Nakamoto's English is very easy to understand, and it shows the characteristics of Chinese-style English from time to time. I am using Grammarly to modify the English translation of this series of articles in the subsequent translation process. Wei Dai and Satoshi Nakamoto's posts are included in the references. Their English habits are the same, and the funniest thing is that they are the same as mine. Several words the Chinese love to use, "in order to," "basically," "in fact," and so on, have been singled out by machines. Why is there no article mentioning this phenomenon?

Wu: Interesting; Grammarly also has this function to modify language habits.

This similarity is indirect evidence that requires accumulating a large amount of evidence. In the absence of direct evidence, indirect evidence affects the jury's opinion. If there must be one person, the most similar person is judged. The most important thing is direct evidence, one move to defeat the enemy. In the section about Satoshi Auburn, I collected a lot of evidence but did not use it. I used three direct pieces of evidence about Satoshi Auburn. The disadvantage is that it is only his own evidence, and he can still quibble. If I prove that Wei Dai is Satoshi Nakamoto, he can still quibble. Evidence requires both parties to check, which is a fatal move. Satoshi Auburn and Satoshi Nakamoto have an oppose relationship, but Satoshi Nakamoto's voice "nour" does not simply say that I am not Craig Wright; it is not a precise verification, indicating that Satoshi Nakamoto Thinking that the appearance of Satoshi Auburn was not completely bad, he did not use a fatal method. According to Satoshi Nakamoto's prediction, the market rejected Satoshi Auburn, but it confused the audiovisual and protected the real Satoshi Nakamoto. Wei Dai and Nakamoto also have a contentious relationship. The following evidence is a cross-examination relationship.

“When I wrote it more than 2 years ago, there were screaming hot SHA1 implementations but minimal attention to SHA256.”^（1）

This sentence follows the previous paragraph, echoes the previous paragraph, and is still discussing the issue of SHA256.

Here "it" in context refers to the SHA256 code.

We know that Wei Dai wrote that the Crypto++ library contains the SHA256 algorithm. Here Satoshi Nakamoto should be "used" and not "wrote." Use and write are basic words of the same level that can be directly replaced; Nakamoto will not use them wrong. Satoshi Nakamoto is a very rigorous and humble person who does not attribute the contributions of others to himself. There is only one explanation at this point; it has forgotten its own identity. Finally, he added:

"(hope you don't mind I renamed your thread, SHA-256 optimisation is something important that I keep forgetting about)."⁽¹⁾ 

SHA256 optimization is Wei Dai's job. Since his freshman year, Wei Dai launched Crypto++, a library for encryption in the C++ language, and maintained it until 2015. Optimization is an important part of maintenance. Currently, this library is still heavily used.

The question asked by the questioner is the optimization involving SHA256 proposed in July 2010. Reference (2) shows that Wei Dai made the optimization in March 2009. There has been another optimization requirement in the past year and three months. The "I" here inadvertently reveals the truth. Satoshi Nakamoto is also responsible for the optimization of SHA256.

This is a contradiction. Let's see what Wei Dai has to say.

Document (2) is Wei Dai's answer to a group of friends' questions about SHA256. Unfortunately, I'm not a technologist and can't understand the background of the difference between SHA256 and OpenSSL; just taking it literally.

The group friend asked: "Also, I understand you haven't read the original bitcoind code(Note: It is the core program of Bitcoin operation)”⁽²⁾

Pay attention to this problem. Friends in the group believe that SHA256 belongs to Wei Dai, but Wei Dai has not read the core program that Bitcoin runs. When the core program runs, a Bitcoin node is established. Each node is responsible for checking the ledger and bookkeeping, so the SHA256 encryption program is used.

group friend: “but do you have any guess for why the author chose to lift your SHA256 implementation from Crypto++ when the project already required OpenSSL-0.9.8h? Is there anything odd about the OpenSSL implementation that wouldn't be immediately obvious to someone who isn't a crypto expert?."^（2）

This paragraph is very interesting. The group of friends means that Satoshi Nakamoto used Wei Dai's SHA256 code; if he is not a cryptographic expert, he should use OpenSSL. Satoshi Nakamoto encrypted the source code with Wei Dai's SHA256, indicating that he is not a cryptographer and should use OpenSSL. In the previous section, we quoted cryptography authority Stuart Haber: "Whoever did this had a deep understanding of cryptography." His article has three quotes in the Bitcoin white paper. Apparently, Satoshi Nakamoto is an expert in cryptography. This groupie was great, and saw the problem right away. As for why it can be guessed that Satoshi Nakamoto is an expert in cryptography by comparing SHA256 and OpenSSL, I don't understand.

Wei Dai replied: "Hmm, I’m not sure. I thought it might have been the optimizations I put into my SHA256 implementation in March 2009 (due to discussions on the NIST mailing list for standardizing SHA-3, about how fast SHA-2 really is), which made it the fastest available at the time, but it looks like Bitcoin 0.1 was already released prior to that (in Jan 2009) and therefore had my old code.

Maybe someone could test if the old code was still faster than OpenSSL?”^（2）

Wei Dai sidesteps the question. Just saying," I'm not sure." Wei Dai is an expert. He can know that the SHA256 he optimized was the fastest at that time and also participates in mining. For his safety, under normal circumstances, he should notify Satoshi Nakamoto to upgrade the SHA256 algorithm, just as Hal did with Satoshi Nakamoto's exchange.

He was so concerned about Bitcoin when discussing the encryption algorithm SHA256 with his group of friends in "LessWrong." If there is a new version of the encryption algorithm code, he should contact Satoshi Nakamoto to say that there is a new code and that we have not seen any program problems, Satoshi and Wei Dai exchange views. Wei Dai, like Hal, was a master programmer of his day. And Wei Dai is a master of C++. His performance should be no worse than Hal's.Irregularity is the problem.

Of course, there may be exchanges, but Wei Dai's remarks on the Bitcoin forum have been deleted, making it impossible to judge. Delete the forum post from Wei Dai and instead say he realizes something; there are loopholes in these posts. If you want to deny my judgment, you must find evidence of his communication with Satoshi Nakamoto. Posts that restore history, we may have unearthed new treasures.

 Failure to notify is unreasonable. It should be said that this old code will be upgraded after March 2009, but he haven't seen the relevant upgrade notice. People who know the history and programs will know the version immediately. I guess that the Wei Dai has unwittingly upgraded.

The problem is afraid of association. Satoshi Nakamoto knows that Wei Da's SHA256 is used, which is also a member of the cypherpunk. It is a bit strange that he does not know Wei Da's B-money and knows David Chaum, Adam, and previous digital currencies have failed, which shows that his knowledge in this area is pervasive, but he does not know Wei Dai and Nick. Then he said that Bitcoin is the realization of the ideas of Wei Dai and Nick and cypherpunks. So there is a problem with being illogical.

It was through Adam that he had an excuse to mail Wei Dai. If Wei Dai's SHA256 is used, Satoshi Nakamoto can find Wei Dai himself, and there is no need to go through Adam. Passing Adam's email makes the public think Satoshi Nakamoto and Wei Dai don't know each other. It is a trick that can be seen at a glance by insiders.

There is a problem with illogicality. Therefore, Wei Dai denies that Satoshi Nakamoto is a member of Cypherpunk, and the issues mentioned above are barely justified.

Satoshi Nakamoto used SHA256 at a high level. For example, when calculating Bitcoin addresses, he calculated SHA256 twice. Vitalik, the founder of Ethereum, said that Satoshi avoided security pitfalls. Adam's encryption algorithm is SH1, and Satoshi Nakamoto used SHA256. Industry insiders commented that he knows cryptography well and has the strength to write SHA256 source code, which is Wei Dai's strength.

Satoshi Nakamoto is a smart, polite, and well-mannered person. Asking Wei Dai for the citation date but not thanking him for using his SHA256 is unreasonable. His e-mail to Wei Dai should have added this line to the original to be in keeping with his polite character。Mark it in red：

Hi Wei Dai:

I used your SHA256 in the bitcoin system; thank you very much. "Adam said that my system is very similar to yours. After I read it, I found that I realized your idea......"

If Wei Dai's SHA256 is used, it is not Satoshi Nakamoto's style the reply that does not thank the other party for his contribution. he used the program of group friends above; he has to thank for renaming "I hope you don't mind that I renamed your thread," why doesn't he thank Wei Dai? In his bones, he wants to distance himself from Wei Dai as much as possible, which is enough to keep him at the level of realizing Wei Dai's thoughts.

There is also a problem; the group friends think that Wei Dai has not read the source code of Bitcoind; there are many SHA256 in the literature (2). Satoshi Nakamoto said, "if you can find a faster SHA256 code than our code", "that is The only thing I've tried." So how does Wei Dai know that the SHA256 in Bitcoin is his? Once the groupie said, Wei Dai recognized it and had not read Bitcoind, how did he know it in advance? He knew in advance that the greatest possible he wrote the code. His new version of SHA256 was released in March 2009, and Satoshi Nakamoto is a V0.1version of the program released in January. It's 2014, and 5 years have passed. Obviously, he has a profound memory of Satoshi Nakamoto's work. He would have been vaguely impressed if he hadn't done it himself.

The problem is afraid to think carefully. But, looking at it from the different perspectives of Wei Dai and Satoshi Nakamoto, only the two are one person, so there are reasonable explanations for so many unreasonable problems above.

Wu: The meaning of what you said is roughly clear. You mean that Satoshi Nakamoto slipped his mouth and said that he wrote SHA256. Could it be a typo?

No, because the optimization of SHA256 is Wei Dai's work. Satoshi Nakamoto said it was his work. There is a contradiction. The subsequent analysis strengthens the evidence and consolidates the first evidence.

In fact, after reading this evidence, technicians can shut up.

The following evidence is understandable to Lao Wu, and first, let's look at Satoshi Nakamoto's attitude toward Wei Dai.

References

1. BitcoinTalk

Re: MSVC build & SHA-256

2010-07-18 21:24:09

If you can find SHA256 code that's faster (with MinGW/GCC) than what we've got, that would be really great! (although, keep licensing in mind)  The one we have is the only one I tried, so there's significant chance for improvement.

When I wrote it more than 2 years ago, there were screaming hot SHA1 implementations but minimal attention to SHA256. That's a lot of time for them to come up with better stuff. SHA256 was a lot slower than the fastest SHA1 at the time than I thought it should be. Obviously SHA256 should be slower than SHA1 by a certain amount, but not by as much as I saw.

(hope you don't mind I renamed your thread, SHA-256 optimisation is something important that I keep forgetting about)

2. Wei Dai March 19th, 2014

https://www.lesswrong.com/

I received another question from this same interlocutor:

“Also, I understand you haven't read the original bitcoind code but do you have any guess for why the author chose to lift your SHA256 implementation from Crypto++ when the project already required openssl-0.9.8h? Is there anything odd about the OpenSSL implementation that wouldn't be immediately obvious to someone who isn't a crypto expert?”

Hmm, I’m not sure. I thought it might have been the optimizations I put into my SHA256 implementation in March 2009 (due to discussions on the NIST mailing list for standardizing SHA-3, about how fast SHA-2 really is), which made it the fastest available at the time, but it looks like Bitcoin 0.1 was already released prior to that (in Jan 2009) and therefore had my old code. Maybe someone could test if the old code was still faster than OpenSSL?

in China link

Here is our article link: https://chainless.hk/ 

worldwide

Chinese link:

https://www.bitpush.news/articles/tag/%E8%AF%B7%E5%87%BA%E4%B8%AD%E6%9C%AC%E8%81%AA

English link: https://en.bitpush.news/?s=Weisha+Zhu

Sun TV's link is as follows:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dTend6oJ-8

Related Articles