Security news

World latest news

How to build a successful offensive security research team

Over the last several years, as the threat landscape has continually evolved, the severity and sheer volume of security vulnerabilities and attacks has accelerated dramatically, causing the tech industry across the world to look for new ways to prevent crippling cyber attacks. In an effort to outthink and outmaneuver attackers, organizations have begun creating offensive security research teams. One well-known team in the industry is Google’s Project Zero. Created back in 2014, its primary purpose was to make computing more secure by proactively rooting out vulnerabilities and flaws that could be exploited by hackers and nation states. Since then, the field has blossomed with organizations like Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Amazon, Oracle and others investing in offensive security research. However, offensive security research teams are still relatively scarce. As more organizations producing technologies, products and services look to join the movement, it’s helpful to understand some best practices and challenges involved in assembling and managing a team, and how to measure success. The Fundamentals of Offensive Security Research First, a quick refresher. By definition, offensive security research initiatives take an aggressive, proactive approach to product security. Most organizations start by judiciously vetting products throughout the various stages of the development lifecycle and stress testing to ensure they’re not exposed to widely-known security vulnerabilities. That said, security is such a broad and dynamic field that screening for known risks only gets you so far. That’s when offensive security researchers step in. These research teams assess the evolving threat landscape – beyond established security vulnerabilities – to identify where researchers and attackers (both well-meaning white hats and cyber criminals) will focus their next efforts. Offensive security researchers look at products through the lens of an advanced attacker, using unconventional approaches to identify weak spots that can be exploited. Assembling Your Team When evaluating research candidates for your team, look for these five key qualities: A deep understanding of the threat landscape – The best offensive security researchers maintain a strong pulse on threats, and the know-how of cutting-edge attack methods in their area of expertise. At Intel we produce a wide range of diverse technologies – each with its own set of security considerations –  so it’s crucial that we have security researchers on staff (and partners in academia) with high-level knowledge in each discipline. One of the visible traits of the right candidate is if they’re incredibly well-read on the latest security publications and have gotten to dissect and understand the anatomy of the vulnerability and exploitation scenarios. Imagination and persistence in applying threat expertise to find complex vulnerabilities and novel exploits – An understanding of the latest attack techniques alone isn’t enough. Researchers must be able to take that expertise and successfully identify the areas of technology that are most likely to be attacked, prioritize them, and conduct scenario analysis to uncover new methods attackers might use to break the product. This process requires a tremendous amount of patience and persistence to navigate the complexity of the technology and the type of threat.  In-depth, systems-level knowledge – Offensive security researchers also need to be systems-level experts, with the technical chops required to operate across hardware, software, firmware and other boundaries within a technology or systems to uncover unforeseen weaknesses that might be buried within any layer of the computing stack. The ability to recommend product-minded threat mitigations – A candidate could exhibit all of the above capabilities, but if they’re unable to come to the table with a potential solution, the jobs only half done with no tangible impact. The work doesn’t stop once a vulnerability is found. Offensive security researchers have to be able to proactively explore potential mitigations for the vulnerabilities they discover, and work with product teams to establish a solution that both eliminates the class of weakness represented by these vulnerabilities and at the same time, preserves product functionality. Follow through to disseminate new security learnings – Lastly, offensive security researchers in a large organization must be capable of turning hidden security issues into known, quantified learnings and prevention/detection actions throughout the organization’s engineering community. Continuity across every stage of the offensive security process is paramount, with little room for handoffs to other researchers. The individual leading each project must see it through to completion. That’s how you ensure that all the critical attributes of each risk are captured, and that the knowledge of each security vulnerability is propagated throughout the organization in a way that eliminates similar issues or the entire class of issues moving forward. Beyond individual research projects, it takes a long time to build the breadth and depth of expertise needed to do offensive security research well as an organization. Employing and retaining researchers that are “in it for the long haul” is key to building that momentum. Common Pitfalls to Avoid Like any other highly-complex, multi-faceted process, managing an offensive security research group carries with it a unique set of challenges. Many of these involve bringing in the right talent, supporting their growth and getting individual researchers to work together as a unit. Deficiencies in any one of the above five talent criteria is typically a sign that a research candidate might not be ready to join the team. Another red flag to watch out for is a disinterest in how their research aligns with the company’s overarching goals. The skills security researchers possess today leave most with no shortage of exciting and lucrative employment opportunities. Finding the right fit all starts with ensuring each researcher is on board with the organization’s big-picture motivations behind product security. Be concerned if it appears a candidate is set on satisfying their own personal research agenda over how the team’s efforts will impact the business and the overall industry/society. Likewise, if a candidate doesn’t display an ability to communicate, learn from, and work well with others, they’re likely to end up stalling your research efforts rather than progressing them. Collaboration is essential in an industry defined by remote workforces distributed across time zones and geographies. The remote team model presents its own set of logistical hurdles, but if your organization is supportive of a location-agnostic workforce and invested in making it work, the research team will be able to attract and retain the best talent. Additionally, the best researchers crave autonomy. Fostering a collaborative, team environment while preserving that desire for independence is another major challenge. It’s critical that you shield these researchers from the types of stifling bureaucracy (perceived or otherwise) that can be so common within organizations. The best way to do this is to ensure that each individual is committed to the common goal, while providing them with flexibility and freedom to achieve the desired outcome as they see fit. Picking Your Battles Once you have the right talent in place on your team, the next major consideration is determining how to prioritize your offensive security research efforts. Most organizations have a broad product and technology landscape to cover, so it’s critical that you’re careful about how you assign the expertise, time and resources available to you. First, ask yourself, how critical is the technology in the product or platform? Consider technologies that are the most fundamental and foundational as the highest priorities. Next, identify any active research taking place for a particular type of technology or product in the industry or academia. This will help you understand what the research community is already thinking about, the common trends in the space, and what the leading methods are for exploring vulnerabilities in a given category. Finally, factor in the realized risk. In some cases, a certain type of attack or vulnerability type is repeatedly demonstrated and prevalent in the industry. You need to think through the best way to eliminate those risks from the products. These steps should help you identify which offensive security research projects to prioritize, but it’s also important to take a measured and tactful approach to doling out assignments to the research team. The best approach is often “self-serve,” if you will. Ask researchers to conduct preliminary analyses independently, and bring the research proposals they’re most excited about back to the group for discussion. This should be done on a frequent basis to ensure that the research roadmap is refreshed regularly. By allowing individual researchers to select projects based on their unique interests, you’re able to tap into their passion for exploring a particular technology or product area. Quantifying Success How can you measure the success of a program? Here are four key indicators: You should be able to attribute the security assurance of your products to the team’s research efforts. The team’s impact on product security should be direct and substantive, not just peripheral. When executives and decision makers are assessing critical decisions related to product security, the offensive research team should be their go-to technical experts, whose opinions are requested and highly valued.The overall trend of security vulnerabilities present in the company’s products should decrease significantly over time, especially when it comes to known threats and technology areas that have been top priorities for the offensive security team. This doesn’t mean that new vulnerabilities and novel attacks will never arise, but they should be few and far between.Your team’s research is seen as a benchmark for innovative security research within the broader industry. Others should view your offensive security researchers as thought leaders in the market with valuable technical know-how that spurs new, ground-breaking research efforts and threat mitigations. Today, the number of offensive security research teams across the entire industry is growing. Not only are they working to improve the security of their own organizations’ products, but they’re collaborating with one another to systematically tackle major software, hardware and firmware vulnerabilities. But, there’s much more work to be done. Consider applying these best practices and guidelines, and join the effort to improve our collective, worldwide security. The post How to build a successful offensive security research team appeared first on SC Media.
SC Media

David Damato Joins Gemini as Chief Security Officer

NEW YORK, Aug. 19, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Gemini Trust Company, LLC (Gemini), a leading cryptocurrency exchange and custodian, announced today that David Damato has joined as its Chief Security Officer. Damato will lead Gemini's security program as it continues to deliver the most secure exchange and custody solution in the cryptocurrency industry. He brings more than 20 years of security leadership experience and will report directly to Gemini's Chief Executive Officer, Tyler Winklevoss. Prior to joining Gemini, Damato served as Chief Security Officer at Tanium, the world's most valuable privately-held cybersecurity company. At Tanium, he was responsible for building and leading a mature cybersecurity team that engineered unique security solutions to help protect government agencies, Fortune 500 companies, and banks around the world. He was also an early member of the leadership team at Mandiant, a premier cybersecurity firm that was later acquired by FireEye. He has also ...Full story available on Benzinga.com
Benzinga

XRP May Be a Security After All, According to New Court Filing

Disgruntled XRP investors haven’t been able to convince lawmakers that the cryptocurrency is being sold by Ripple as an unregistered security, but that could be about to […] The post XRP May Be a Security After All, According to New Court Filing appeared first on Hacked: Hacking Finance.
Hacked

HutZero, the Government-Funded Cyber Security Programme, Launches its Fifth Bootcamp

HutZero is part of the UK Government’s quest to discover up-and-coming talent and bolster the UK’s credentials as a global centre for cyber security expertise  122 participants have now taken part in the HutZero programme The group is formed of academics, entrepreneurs and corporate cyber experts  20 new cyber businesses have been supported by the programme Twenty-four cyber entrepreneurs today join HutZero, the week-long government-backed ‘bootcamp’ that includes training and mentoring by some of Britain’s best cyber brains and cyber security companies.  The programme, held in London, includes workshops on technical development, business fundamentals and team building.  CyLon run the programme along with the Centre for Secure Information Technologies (CSIT) at Queen’s University, Belfast.  CyLon’s co-founder Grace Cassy said:  “HutZero brings together people with an interest in cyber security and helps them shape their ideas into tangible businesses. Through HutZero the next generation of cyber entrepreneurs can test their innovations and develop the skills and confidence needed to build a company.  We’ve supported 20 new cyber businesses to date through the programme, and we hope by the end of the week HutZero 5 will have inspired this group of budding entrepreneurs to create more new UK startups.” The bootcamp is followed by a three-month period of mentoring by a panel of experts recruited from academia, business, government and investors, with the aim of launching the next generation of cyber security startups.  The programme is wholly funded by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS).   The post HutZero, the Government-Funded Cyber Security Programme, Launches its Fifth Bootcamp appeared first on The Fintech Times.
The Fintech Times

Why Litecoin’s dominance over its mining algorithm is critical for security

Charlie Lee announced that Litecoin controls 98 percent of the hash rate for its “Scrypt” mining algorithm. This dominance is critical for the security of LTC. Meanwhile, other coins which have minority control over their algorithm, such as Bitcoin Cash and SV, remain at high risk of malicious attack. On Aug. 12, Litecoin creator Charlie Lee announced that his coin had over 98 percent of the market share of its unique ASIC-dominated mining algorithm ‘Scrypt.’ Here's the current state of Scrypt mining after the Litecoin halving. Litecoin still dominates the Scrypt mining scene with 98.57% of all Scrypt hashrate pointed at mining Litecoin. 👍 Note: Merged mined doesn't count towards total. I got the data from: https://t.co/3dcY7yrTGo https://t.co/N2vN6RbVeq pic.twitter.com/LucwNaAthN — Charlie Lee [LTC⚡] (@SatoshiLite) August 12, 2019 Hash rate majority over Scrypt, or any mining algorithm, plays an important role in maintaining the security of the network against hostile mining attacks meant to pillage a cryptocurrency. Hostile mining attacks Game theory plays an important role in well-designed cryptocurrencies. Unlike its technological predecessors, crypto leverages economic incentives to ensure participants are honest and that networks are salient against bad actors. When these incentives are misaligned the system breaks. One poorly understood aspect of proof-of-work cryptocurrencies is the importance of hash rate dominance within a particular mining algorithm. If a miner is able to achieve majority hash power (51 percent hash rate) in a particular coin, then there are several hostile attacks that they could perform on a network. One obvious attack is rejecting blocks from everyone else, allowing a miner to take every block reward. Other more complex attacks include denying transactions and attempting to conduct double-spends, as described in an essay by renowned Bitcoin developer and evangelist Jimmy Song. Another more exotic attack described by Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin is described as “selfish mining,” where a miner with less than 25 percent or less of the network hash rate can coerce other miners into cartelization by manipulating how blocks are found. For smaller coins these attacks are even easier because a large miner on a dominant coin can easily control more than 50 percent of a smaller coin’s hash power. For more information on the anatomy of 51% attacks read here. Incentives usually align between network and miners That said, even if a miner had majority control of a coin’s hash power, there are concrete reasons why they are still incentivized to behave honestly. Hostile miners take on lots of risk, as described in a highly cited essay by David Vorick, the co-founder of Sia and Obelisk. Other stakeholders in a network can limit the damage done by a hostile miner. For example, in Bitcoin full node operators could reject blocks from hostile miners, says Vorick. The value of the cryptocurrency the miner is attacking would also likely plummet, decreasing the long-term profitability of that miner’s highly specialized mining equipment (for ASICs). This is in addition to the reputational damage a miner would face. As said by David Vorick: “To put it simply, this attack really doesn’t make much sense from an economic perspective because there is simply not enough upside for the attacker.” ASICs as bonds In a sense, ASICs behave like a security bond between a miner and the cryptocurrency network they support. Assuming the coin has a dominant position for its mining algorithm, if a miner were to conduct an attack it would damage the value of the cryptocurrency they are mining. This would reduce the value of subsequent block rewards and as a result, reduce the long term revenues—and value—of that miner’s ASICs, assuming they couldn’t switch to another coin. Proof-of-stake algorithms attempt to mimic this dynamic through the use of stake slashing, where stakers put down collateral in the form of more coins that can be redistributed. In aggregate, the short-term revenue from double-spends, block reward hoarding, and transaction denial would need to outweigh both the risk of failure and the long-term damage to revenue. Pillaging attacks on minority coins That said, there are key circumstances where the economics actually encourage hostile attacks on a cryptocurrency—specifically in cases where a coin has the minority share of a particular mining algorithm. When two or more cryptocurrencies use the same mining algorithm seldom do they have a similar proportion of the total hash rate. Bitcoin, for example, has a 90 percent dominance over SHA-256 while Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin SV, and all other forks control less than 10 percent. Another drastic example is Zcash, which maintains a 98 percent share of Equihash while coins like Horizen (formerly Zen) and Hush control the remainder. In these scenarios, it makes sense for a miner to switch from mining a dominant coin, such as Bitcoin, to a secondary coin, like Bitcoin Cash, to conduct an attack. Hash rate privateers The reasoning: there are fewer economic penalties for this behavior. As mentioned above, hostile attacks usually reduce long term miner revenues. When a miner attacks a minority coin the reduction in long term revenue may be negligible. These attacks aren’t just a concern for ASICs but also for general purpose hardware. CPUs and GPUs have healthy secondary resale markets. Many coins are also designing their mining algorithms to compete for these devices. As a result, miners can attack and switch with impunity. In these scenarios a miner can switch to a secondary coin and ransack the cryptocurrency. After flooding the market with illicit coins the miner can then return to safely mining the dominant coin while reaping a tidy profit. Not just theory These attacks aren’t just theoretical. Both Ethereum Classic and Zen (which rebranded to Horizen to mitigate reputational damage) suffered 51% attacks because of the phenomenon described above. Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV also suffered similar attacks during their split and their ensuing hash war. These considerations are important to keep in mind for those looking to hold cryptocurrency, especially altcoins, as investments. Evaluating whether a coin is at risk of mining attacks, or relatively safe like Litecoin, has meaningful implications for long term returns. The post Why Litecoin’s dominance over its mining algorithm is critical for security appeared first on CryptoSlate.
Cryptoslate
More news sources

Security news by Finrazor

ESSENTIAL

The Beginner’s Guide to Monero

Monero is an anonymous digital currency that enables untraceable and unlinkable transactions by obfuscating a public ledger. It combines ring signatures, stealth addresses, Kovri and RingCT in a way that hides senders, recipients, their IP addresses and transacted amounts

Read more
DIGEST

New rules for regulation of crypto exchanges

Women in Afghanistan will use ETH, the Binance's account is hacked, Binance will allow fiat-crypto trading, The Moscow Exchange is preparing for ICOs, South Korea announced new regulation rules, Tron bought BitTorrent, Apple is against mining, Tezos will have fork before launch.

Read more

Trending

Hot news

Hot world news

Stand Aside Libra, Binance’s ‘Venus’ is the New Sheriff in Town

Ever since Facebook unveiled its Libra cryptocurrency, the project has encountered regulators’ wrath across the world. However, governments, crypto exchanges, and institutions think that Libra is a great idea and they are now developing their local tokens to rival Libra. The People’s Bank of China is reported to be developing a token that will encroach the market that Facebook targets. The latest entrant into this race is Binance. This top crypto exchange announced that it will launch an open blockchain project dubbed ‘Venus’. The project aims to develop localized stablecoins throughout the world. In an official announcement published on August 19, the exchange said that it is perfectly positioned to launch such a currency ecosystem. The move comes in the wake of its existing public chain technology, Binance Chain. The public chain comprises of a wide user base and an already existing global compliance measures infrastructure. Leveraging Already Active Know-how Binance announced that it is looking for partnerships with corporations, governments, technology firms, and other blockchain and crypto projects. It aims to develop a new currency ecosystem that will empower the developed and developing nations. Furthermore, the exchange’s vision for its Venus project is to create a new open alliance and sustainable community. The community is meant to accept and enlist all partners who have influence globally. According to the announcement, Binance Chain already supports multiple native asset-pegged stablecoins. Some of the stablecoins that it runs include the Binance BGBP Stable Coin (BGBP) that is pegged to the British Pound and the Bitcoin (BTC)-pegged stablecoin (BTCB). Additionally, Binance says that it will leverage the existing infrastructure and experience with different regulatory regimes. That will enable it to set up a compliance risk control system and create a multi-dimensional cooperation network for the Venus project. Contending with Libra The new ambitious venture by Binance seems to compete directly with Facebook’s fiat-pegged stablecoin, Libra. Facebook’s wants to launch a system that will power a global cryptocurrency payments network integrated into the company’s wholly-owned apps that include Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram. The choice of this name ‘Venus’ seems to show that Binance is also entering the astrological waters. These waters feature the Winklevoss Twins’ Gemini dollar and Gemini exchange together with Facebook’s Libra project. Whether Venus will outmuscle Libra in the new global stablecoin space or not, only time will tell. Like what you're reading? Subscribe to our top stories The post Stand Aside Libra, Binance’s ‘Venus’ is the New Sheriff in Town appeared first on FXTimes.com - Daily Cryptocurrency and FX News.
Cryptovibes

Binance Announces New Stablecoin Initiative Venus – the “One-belt-one-road Version of Libra”

The world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange Binance has announced the plan of launching an open blockchain project “Venus”, an initiative to develop localized stablecoins and digital assets pegged to fiat currencies across the globe. As per the announcement published today Aug.19, the localized stablecoin initiative will leverage the exchange’s existing infrastructure such as its public chain Binance Chain and cross-border payment systems, wider user base and already established global compliance measures. Bearing a similar vision with social media giant Facebook’s Libra, “Venus”, defined as a “regional version of Libra”, aims to break down the financial hegemony and reshape the world’s financial system, which enables latecomers to have more initiative and stability in finance, as well as enhance the economic efficiency of countries. The exchange says it is seeking “partnerships with governments, corporations, technology companies, and other cryptocurrency companies and projects involved in the larger blockchain ecosystem, to empower developed and developing countries to spur new currencies.” “We believe that in the near and long term, stablecoins will progressively replace traditional fiat currencies in countries around the world, and bring a new and balanced standard of the digital economy.” said He Yi, Binance co-founder and CMO. In its Chinese version of the announcement, the exchange believes that “Libras are growing at an exponential rate and will reshape the world financial system, bringing changes more than the Internet. Instead of resisting change and losing the opportunity, it is better to embrace the change. Under the planned economy system, the successful experience of Shenzhen’s bold exploration of market economy is a good case. At the same time, Libras need to be developed in an orderly manner under the regulatory framework.” In conclusion, it added three suggestions for the Chinese regulators – The central government should establish the core strategic position of blockchain industry and digital stablecoin in the future financial system; Establish a regulatory sandbox within a certain scope and pilot payment and settlement services based on digital stablecoin; Allow private enterprises to issue digital stablecoins and develop cross-border payment and settlement systems. Prior to it, Zhou Xiaochuan, the former governor of PBOC (People’s Bank of China), stated that Libra represents the trend of digital currencies, China should take precautions and undertake policy research. Following that, Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei  said that China can issue a Libra-like currency to take the lead in the blockchain sector. With these positive signals, the exchange is responsive and acting fast. Its cofounder He Yi said “Venus” is the “One-belt-one-road version of Libra”. Cofounder of Binance .@heyibinance said “Venus” is the “One-belt-one-road version of Libra” Totally nailed it pic.twitter.com/RqfaPH8zE1 — Dovey Wan 🦖 (@DoveyWan) August 19, 2019
8BTC

HyperCash, Metal, WePower and Bread Top All Cryptos; Coins as a Whole Up 1.66% Overall, 18 Coins Have Contracting Volatility

Yesterday’s Movers and Shakers Since yesterday, the coin that fared the best out of the 133 coins in our index was HyperCash, whose price is up 51.55%. Rounding out the top four currencies for the day were Metal, WePower, and Bread, which provided holders with returns of 17.75%, 13.98%, and 12.04% for the day. These moves were notable not only for their magnitude relative to other coins, but also because they were large and surprising relative to the volatility of each of these currencies over the past two weeks. Interested in trading these currencies? Some brokers to try: Gate, Yobit, Stex, Binance, DDEX, ETHfinex A Macro View of the Crypto Market Overall, the average change in coin price for the coins we’re tracking was up 1.6592%. On a more granular level, 65% of the coins we’re tracking were up while 35% of the coins were down. Below we can see the average daily change for the coins we are tracking our index over time. Since yesterday, 3 have crossed their 20 day moving average; these coins may be of interest to traders who believe the 20 day moving average may be a key level that draws traders in. Interested in trading these currencies? Some brokers to try: Gate, Yobit, Stex, Binance, DDEX, ETHfinex Currencies With Significant Price Moves The coins that crossed their moving average are: Chainlink, Verge, HyperCash. Likewise, volatility has continued to trend lower and contract for 18 of the 133 coins in our index; contracting volatility often precedes a breakout, so these coins may be gearing up for a larger move. The chart below drills down a bit more, featuring 4 currencies with contracting volatility that are trading below their moving average. Are these coins forming a bottom? Interested in trading these currencies? Some brokers to try: Gate, Yobit, Stex, Binance, DDEX, ETHfinex Article by SixJupiter The post HyperCash, Metal, WePower and Bread Top All Cryptos; Coins as a Whole Up 1.66% Overall, 18 Coins Have Contracting Volatility appeared first on DecentralPost.
DecentralPost

The Latest Satoshi Nakamoto ‘Reveal’ Is Actually Quite Compelling

The origin story of Bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto, has seen outright lies, conjecture, and its fair share of ‘reveals’. By now, for many, it has become irrelevant, and any new ‘revelation’ gains a healthy dose of cynicism. But here we are again, with a promise of an unveiling in little under 36 hours. Could it be different this time? I’m Satoshi Nakamoto, And So Is My Wife You could be forgiven for having a touch of Satoshi Nakamoto fatigue. In the past few months alone, we’ve endured multiple theories regarding an Estonian connection, a drug lord who invented Bitcoin purely to launder money, and a failed attempt at viral marketing (anybody actually use PAI news?). Not forgetting, of course, Craig Wright’s ongoing delusion in the face of mounting evidence of his serial forgery. So when a new website appears claiming that ‘all will be revealed’ in a three part series of posts… well you’ve got to expect it to be taken with a(n un)healthy pinch of salt. But that’s exactly what happened over the weekend. We even got to read the first part of the three-part reveal, and… it’s strangely compelling. Satoshi Nakamoto Renaissance Holdings The website bears the name ‘ Satoshi Nakamoto Renaissance Holdings’, and the ‘Truth’ is as told to Ivy McLemore, a PR and marketing consultant… and apparently a man. So far, so readily dismissible as another waste of time marketing ploy. The site even admits that part three of ‘My Reveal’, along with the Nakamoto’s true identity, will provide details about Tabula Rasa, Satoshi’s vision (sorry Craig) for the future of Bitcoin. But if this is just another attempt to cash-in on the Bitcoin bandwagon, then whoever is involved has done a better job than most of the others. Names, Numbers, And A Chip On His Shoulder The fact that ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’ has a beef against the banking industry will come as a shock to no-one. The fact that this beef harks back to the 1991 closure of the ‘World’s Sleaziest Bank’, BBCI might. Allegedly, part of his motivation was to redeem BCCI, even going so far as basing the name of Bitcoin on it; Bank of CredIT and COmmerce INternational. He also had trouble opening a bank account when visiting the UK. According to this latest ‘testimony’, Satoshi came from Satoshi Sumita, a Japanese Central Banker, who presided during a period when the country became the world’s largest creditor nation. Satoshi was also an exact match in Chaldean numerology (which also features greatly) for Nakamoto’s childhood nickname of ‘Shaikho’. Nakamoto came from Hal Finney, who helped him to create Bitcoin. Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto lived in the same California neighbourhood as Finney. He was later mistakenly identified as the Bitcoin creator by Newsweek. Satoshi Nakamoto is the number 55 in Chaldean numerology, representing the total and complete man. Finney also provided remote computers to work on, leading some to speculate that Nakamoto had been based in California. He had actually started his work in Pakistan, later travelling between Pakistan and the UK. ‘Nakamoto’ describes Finney as his Steve Wozniak, the technical genius who partnered Steve Jobs at Apple. The Best Is Yet To Come So part one of ‘My Reveal’ is detailed, fits some of what we already know about Nakamoto, and explains some of the things that we didn’t know. And the best bit is that we don’t have to wait too long for parts two and three. Part two, available at 4pm EST today, will reveal more about how Nakamoto’s belief in Chaldean numerology influenced many of his decisions regarding the development of Bitcoin. It will also give all the facts about his 980,000 BTC personal stash. Then part three will be published just 24 hours later. Will we finally learn Satoshi Nakamoto’s real-life identity, and his vision for the future of Bitcoin? Craig Wright must be quaking in his loafers… or sitting smug in the knowledge that this is just a ploy, and he is the real… nah, just kidding, quaking in his loafers. Do you think this time Satoshi Nakamoto will finally reveal his/herself? Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below! Images via Shutterstock The post The Latest Satoshi Nakamoto ‘Reveal’ Is Actually Quite Compelling appeared first on Bitcoinist.com.
Bitcoinist
By continuing to browse, you agree to the use of cookies. Read Privacy Policy to know more or withdraw your consent.