Onchain Analysis Satoshi

OneSignature is Not Satoshi

As explained in the previous post (which you can read here if you haven’t), a mysterious user named OneSignature appeared on the BitcoinTalk forum, a historic forum where there are numerous Satoshi posts, signing an address with bitcoin mined in 2009 and an outgoing transaction in 2011. The address (1NChfewU45oy7Dgn51HwkBFSixaTnyakfj) has block mining TX 1018. The signature is the most dated/oldest ever to appear on a bitcoin address.

The (few) certainties

Let us start with the few certainties, namely the signature and its verification.

We have noticed some unnecessary discussions about the supposed invalidity of the signature, and let’s settle that right away; the signature is authentic. We used Electrum connected to a Bitcoin full node, but you could use hundreds of other different methods; the signature is certainly authentic. After making sure that the signature is authentic, let’s take a closer look at the blockchain to understand more about it.

The analysis of blockchain

The address signed by OneSignature contained 50 Bitcoin that are aggregated to the address 1LseHYUYUXkL4Jdd4YTTXvWNqDceTdQXrt along with another 1,950 BTC, this occurs in 2011.

From signed address to aggregation

The Bitstamp inflow

Next, some transactions occur that deserve attention for analysis. Some Bitcoin are deposited at the address 17jz6XcXP2LPqS8gYmT2pkNJocUDzbpQuM traceable to a deposit address. On the same deposit address it is also possible to reconstruct most of the additional addresses owned by the same owner.

A total of 9,106 Bitcoins are deposited at the Bitstamp address, all transactions traceable to the same owner, and deposit activity occurs through December 22, 2014. Almost all of the Bitcoin are mining rewards.

The inflow on MtGox

Another interesting transaction is the one that occurred to the address 1JWgqCduauH2dBQZ3WE6TN5e2pFtRMGHNr traceable to MtGox

The Silkroad address connection?

From MtGox further transactions to the address 1QY4sSvRw2jS6QPn7GjYLaWwW73u8MLsb traceable to SilkRoadMarketplace, the famous Darknet marketplace for which Ross Ulbricht is now serving a life sentence.

Below is a complete representation of the flow.

We can exclude that OneSignature is Satoshi

Satoshi is a careful person, manic about privacy. The chances that OneSignature could be Satoshi in my opinion are ZERO. Satoshi would never, with such superficiality, leave such obvious traces, especially to two CEX exchanges that can easily identify his identity.
It is not in his philosophy and it is not in his way of acting, always attentive to every single detail since the early days and he would never have committed such trivialities.

But we continue to explore further

Patoshi signature

If all these clues are not enough, further verification clues may come from independent researcher Sergio Demian Lerner. It has carried out an in-depth analysis on the possible blocks extracted from Satoshi, they are vulgarly called Patoshi Block.

Explained in a very simplified way, Satoshi most likely used a different mining software than the one initially distributed, so it was possible through traces left behind in block mining to reconstruct what are most likely blocks mined by Satoshi.

If we go to analyze block 1018, which is the one precisely signed by OneSignature, it does not show up among the possible Satoshi extracted blocks:

Screenshot Source :

Conclusion. Where did that signature come from and why? The possible idea of NFTs

One of the most likely explanations is that someone may have sniffed out a business opportunity: converting old BTC addresses to NFTs and then selling them. Such old types of addresses may acquire archaeological value. You may not even need to own the private key to own the NFT. You can learn more about the idea in this post.

An idea that I think is difficult to develop, but which confirms for us a doubt:

OneSignature is not Satoshi

Other Charts


Address Distribution


Other Data