In a recent article published by Coinspeaker, new research suggests that the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, may have exploited the network in 2009 by launching a 51% mining attack. This type of attack occurs when an entity or group controls more than 50% of the network, giving them the ability to alter the blockchain.
The speculation arose after a detailed review of 2009 blocks mined by a miner known as “Patoshi,” who used a non-standard ExtraNonce within Coinbase transaction data. It was discovered that Patoshi’s hash power was likely used to reorganize Bitcoin’s blockchain, indicating a potential 51% attack. The miner would periodically take breaks from mining, during which their computer restart was so powerful that they could overwrite blocks found by other miners in their absence.
Some members of the crypto community believe that Patoshi and Satoshi Nakamoto are the same person, as both were actively mining Bitcoin in 2009. Further research by Wicked Smart Bitcoin suggests that Patoshi likely conducted a 51% mining attack in 2009, building on earlier work by Sergio Demian Lerner.
It is important to note that this suspected 51% attack was not for financial gain but rather as a stress test, as Bitcoin had no significant value at the time. Wicked Smart Bitcoin stated that Satoshi Nakamoto may have conducted real-world stress tests to check the integrity and robustness of the system he had built.
While the veracity of Satoshi Nakamoto’s 51% attack on Bitcoin remains uncertain, crypto analytics firm Coin Metrics has stated that a recurrence is unlikely. The firm published research in February noting the astronomical costs of conducting such attacks, estimating that orchestrating a 51% attack on Bitcoin would require 7 million ASIC mining rigs and cost around $20 billion.
Overall, the debate surrounding Satoshi Nakamoto’s potential exploitation of Bitcoin in 2009 raises questions about the early days of the cryptocurrency and the motivations behind such actions. As the crypto industry continues to evolve, it is essential to understand the history and implications of past events on the network’s security and integrity.