Big Questions: Did the NSA create Bitcoin?

16 August 2023

Cointelegraph By Felix Ng

Over the 15 years since Bitcoin was created, there has been no shortage of crazy conspiracy theories about how it was made and where it came from.

Some believe Bitcoin was the work of “a bunch of engineers” in the Chinese Communist Party — presumably for world domination; others claim Bitcoin is the work of benevolent aliens to help humans evolve.

But one theory with circumstantial evidence supporting it has persisted over the years — and it involves one of America’s most secretive intelligence-gathering agencies.

There’s a small sect of Bitcoiners that believes Satoshi Nakamoto — the creator of Bitcoin — is, in fact, the United States National Security Agency in disguise.

Many more, of course, think the idea is ridiculous and point out there’s no absolutely no solid evidence to support it.

But where does the theory stem from? Well, one only needs to look into Bitcoin’s source code.

It’s in the code

What makes Bitcoin so secure lies in its use of Secure Hash Algorithm 256, or SHA-256 (read as sha), which is used for everything from deriving transaction IDs and block hashes to addresses and Merkle trees.

Put simply, it’s a mathematical formula that garbles data into a string of seemingly random text, and it’s why Bitcoin is basically impossible to crack.

Well, it just so happens that this algorithm is the direct work of Glenn M. Lilly, a mathematician who, under the direction of the NSA, designed and eventually published the algorithm in 2001. Lilly later became the NSA’s chief of mathematics research.

The NSA was also one of the first organizations to describe a Bitcoin-like system in a 1996 paper titled How To Make A Mint: The Cryptography Of Anonymous Electronic Cash.

In the paper, the authors proposed a system that uses public-key cryptography to allow users to make anonymous payments without revealing their identity.

The NSA’s 1996 plan to create anonymous electronic cash. (archive.org)

Satoshi Nakamoto is code for the CIA?

Of course, some Bitcoiners don’t think the NSA invented Bitcoin…. they reckon it was the Central Intelligence Agency.

The name of Bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto, can be interpreted as a reference to the U.S. spy agency. Nakamoto, loosely translated from Japanese, means “central,” while the name Satoshi means “intelligent.”

“Satoshi Nakamoto” means “central intelligence” in Japanese. Really. Look it up. (Ancestry.com)

Speaking of Satoshi, their identity has never been uncovered, prompting some to believe they are likely to have had some form of intelligence training.

In an interview with Impact Theory’s Tom Bilyeu in June, former Goldman Sachs executive and Real Vision CEO Raoul Pal revealed he’s believed for years that Bitcoin could be the result of the NSA and the United Kingdom’s government experimenting with potential ways to get out of future potential financial disasters.

“I don’t think it’s a coincidence it came out in the financial crisis. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the halving cycle and all of this is all related.”

So, did the NSA create Bitcoin?

Jeff Man, a former NSA cryptanalyst, tells Magazine that it’s “feasible” that the NSA could have created Bitcoin as a means to gather intelligence about its enemies, but is doubtful.

Read also


Features

Tokenomics not Ponzi-nomics: Influencing behavior, making money


Features

Bitcoin 2022 — Will the real maximalists please stand up?

Man joined the NSA in 1986 at the tail end of the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States. At the time, the NSA was hiring around 100 people a week to fill roles in critical skills, including engineering, mathematics and computer science, he says.

One of the NSA’s main missions is to gather signals (or communications) intelligence necessary for the country’s defense. This became an even higher priority following the September 11, 2001, terror attacks on the World Trade Center.

Plumes of smoke billow from the World Trade Center towers. (Michael Foran, CC BY 2.0, Wikicommons)

Asked about whether Bitcoin could have been created to gather intelligence about foreign agents and powers, Man said the agency certainly had the resources to do so.

“It’s certainly a possibility. It’s certainly feasible,” says Man.

“It’s not outside of the realm of possibility that there would be a concerted effort to set up something like this.”

However, Man has strong doubts about it, based on his experience at the agency. He notes that one of the outcomes of the Watergate scandal in 1972 put a congressional spotlight on America’s three-letter agencies, which were found spying on American citizens without proper warrants.

Man believes, at least based on his years at the NSA, that the agency had since been very cautious not to breach its charter and that devising Bitcoin could be seen as spying on its own citizens.

“Historically, in my experience, NSA takes very seriously its charter to only do what NSA does to foreigners, and not U.S. citizens.”

“Because it would be hard to prove or disprove perhaps who the targets were, or who were the potential targets. It would be hard to say definitively: ‘We did not do any of this capability — we did not set it up and target any U.S. citizens.’ That makes me doubt that it happened.”

Read also


Features

5 years of the ‘Top 10 Cryptos’ experiment and the lessons learned


Features

Decentralized identity: Proving it’s really you in the 21st Century

Man, however, noted that he left the agency back in 1996 and conceded that the 2001 terror attacks and the subsequent Patriot Act may have changed this.

The Edward Snowden leaks in 2013 alleged the NSA had been gathering data on domestic internet communications without the proper warrants, an idea the U.S. government has denied.

No, the whole idea is silly

Of course, most Bitcoiners completely dismiss the idea the NSA invented Bitcoin.

While SHA-256 is used in Bitcoin, it also just happens to be one of the most widely used hash algorithms, making its presence in anything from digital signatures to password authentication.

The fact it was made public in 2001 means that everyone had access to it long before Bitcoin was invented. And no one has ever identified a secret backdoor into the SHA-256 algorithm or suggested a credible way it could be cracked.

Silicon Angle’s Mellisa Tolentino addressed the notion that ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’ could be a veiled reference to “Central Intelligence”, writing that the argument is “not very compelling.” Satoshi Nakamoto is a fairly common Japanese name, and spy agencies don’t tend to leave easter eggs calling attention to the fact they’re involved.

“Would the NSA really have given the creator of its ‘secret project’ such an obvious name? If the NSA really is behind Bitcoin, naming it “Central Intelligence” would not be a very intelligent move.”

Others have argued that Bitcoin’s first proof-of-concept software was more of a “clever patchwork” of old cryptography algorithms, which wouldn’t be something an organized intelligence behemoth would come up with.

And the idea that Nakamoto must have intelligence-training credentials, given that he has remained anonymous all these years also falls apart the closer you look at it.

“It ignores the fact that thousands (if not millions) of people manage to remain anonymous online everyday,” Ian DeMartino wrote in a Cointelegraph editorial.

“I have had internet friends that I talked to for years, on message boards and elsewhere, without ever meeting or talking on the phone. I suspect many reading this have had similar experiences. I don’t suspect all of them are CIA agents.”

Will we ever find out if the NSA invented Bitcoin?

It seems unlikely we’ll ever know for certain whether the NSA was involved in Bitcoin, at least not in our lifetime, says Man.

“You will never get the answer to that definitively until it doesn’t matter anymore.”

“If it’s this honeypot type of scenario, where it’s a resource for information […] and it’s still providing results and information, you’re never going to get the definitive answer,” he adds.

  

You might also like

Trump supports bill to buy 1 million BTC — Senator Lummis  
Trump supports bill to buy 1 million BTC — Senator Lummis  

US President Donald Trump supports the BITCOIN Act and has a team of experts in the White House working to roll out landmark digital asset legislation in the coming weeks, according to Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis. Speaking at the Bitcoin 2025 conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, Lummis said she is bringing the BITCOIN ACT to the “attention of the American people and the world,” adding that, “President Trump supports the bill.”In March, Lummis reintroduced the BITCOIN Act — landmark legislation that directs the US government to acquire 1 million Bitcoin (BTC) over five years. The acquisitions would be financed using existing funds within the Federal Reserve System and the Treasury Department. As Cointelegraph reported, the Trump administration has reiterated the need to use “budget-neutral ways” to acquire Bitcoin without burdening taxpayers.Source: CryptoGoosAt the Bitcoin Conference, Lummis said the Trump administration has a team working on “digital asset issues,” including legislation on stablecoins, market structure and the Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.“They will probably roll out in that order,” she said.“The Senate Banking Committee has passed the stablecoin bill out of committee,” said Lummis, adding: “We’re getting close to being ready to have it on the floor. We’ve worked for untold hours with the minority party to satisfy them, and we should be voting on it the week before we get back from this break.”Related: Senator Lummis’ new BITCOIN Act allows US reserve to exceed 1M BitcoinGENIUS Act on stablecoins is “going to pass,” says White House crypto czarThe White House seems to be in alignment with Senator Lummis. Last week, Trump’s top crypto adviser, David Sacks, said the GENIUS stablecoin bill is “going to pass” the Senate with bipartisan support after clearing a key procedural vote on May 19.On May 19, the Senate voted 66 to 32 to advance debate on the GENIUS Bill. Source: US SenateGENIUS refers to the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins Act, possibly the most comprehensive federal push to establish a legal framework for dollar-pegged stablecoins.Stablecoins have become one of the most prominent use cases for blockchain technology, with some industry advocates arguing that they could help extend the US dollar’s dominance as the global reserve currency.Collateralized, dollar-backed stablecoins like Tether’s USDt (USDT) and Circle’s USDC (USDC) account for more than 85% of the $250 billion market, according to CoinMarketCap.Related: Former CFTC chair criticizes STABLE Act amid calls for urgent regulatory clarity

Growing BTC reserve requires Congressional legislation — VanEck exec  
Growing BTC reserve requires Congressional legislation — VanEck exec  

Building a permanent US strategic Bitcoin reserve would likely require targeted legislation rather than executive action, according to VanEck’s head of digital assets, Matthew Sigel. Speaking at Bitcoin 2025 in Las Vegas, Sigel said the most viable path forward may involve inserting Bitcoin mining incentives into the congressional budget reconciliation process.According to Sigel, the most effective path to growing a US strategic Bitcoin reserve would be through targeted amendments to congressional budget legislation. These could include tax credits for mining companies that use methane gas and other incentives aimed at encouraging miners to share a portion of their mined BTC with the federal government. He argued that such an approach would allow the reserve to grow organically over time. Sigel also highlighted the limitations of executive actions in achieving this goal:”The problem with executive action is that it’s going to prompt lawsuits. And anything over $100 million is going to get sued by the Elizabeth Warrens of the world. So, I would say start with something maybe in the Exchange Stabilization Fund for $100 million.”US President Donald Trump established the US Bitcoin Strategic Reserve through a March 7 executive order. According to the order, the US government can only acquire Bitcoin through budget-neutral strategies or asset forfeiture, prompting a range of different ideas on how to add to the government’s stockpile of nearly 200,000 BTC.From left to right, Alex Thorn, Matthew Sigel, Matthew Pines and Fred Thiel. Source: Turner Wright/CointelegraphRelated: Bitcoin’s new highs may have been driven by Japan bond market crisisLawmakers, officials pitch different ideas to grow strategic Bitcoin reserveWyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis, the US lawmaker who introduced legislation for a Bitcoin strategic reserve in July 2024, proposed converting a portion of the gold certificates held by the US Treasury to Bitcoin.Converting gold to Bitcoin would allow the US government to purchase more Bitcoin without incurring a cost to the taxpayer, Lummis said.Bo Hines, the executive director of the President’s Council of Advisers on Digital Assets, echoed the idea in March 2025.Hines called on the US Treasury to revalue its gold holdings, which are currently priced at just $42.22 per troy ounce, and convert a portion of those gains to Bitcoin. This strategy would also be budget-neutral, Hines said.The price of gold reached an all-time high of $3,500 per ounce in April but experienced a minor pullback to around $3,300 on May 27.Magazine: TradFi fans ignored Lyn Alden’s BTC tip — Now she says it’ll hit 7 figures: X Hall of Flame

ZKPs can prove I'm old enough without telling you my age  
ZKPs can prove I'm old enough without telling you my age  

Opinion by: Andre Omietanski, General Counsel, and Amal Ibraymi, Legal Counsel at Aztec LabsWhat if you could prove you’re over 18, without revealing your birthday, name, or anything else at all? Zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) make this hypothetical a reality and solve one of the key challenges online: verifying age without sacrificing privacy. The need for better age verification todayWe’re witnessing an uptick in laws being proposed restricting minors’ access to social media and the internet, including in Australia, Florida, and China. To protect minors from inappropriate adult content, platform owners and governments often walk a tightrope between inaction and overreach. For example, the state of Louisiana in the US recently enacted a law meant to block minors from viewing porn. Sites required users to upload an ID before viewing content. The Free Speech Coalition challenged the law as unconstitutional, making the case that it infringed on First Amendment rights. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed on procedural grounds. The reaction, however, highlights the dilemma facing policymakers and platforms: how to block minors without violating adults’ rights or creating new privacy risks.Traditional age verification failsCurrent age verification tools are either ineffective or invasive. Self-declaration is meaningless, since users can simply lie about their age. ID-based verification is overly invasive. No one should be required to upload their most sensitive documents, putting themselves at risk of data breaches and identity theft. Biometric solutions like fingerprints and face scans are convenient for users but raise important ethical, privacy, and security concerns. Biometric systems are not always accurate and may generate false positives and negatives. The irreversible nature of the data, which can’t be changed like a regular password can, is also less than ideal. Other methods, like behavioral tracking and AI-driven verification of browser patterns, are also problematic, using machine learning to analyze user interactions and identify patterns and anomalies, raising concerns of a surveillance culture.ZKPs as the privacy-preserving solutionZero-knowledge proofs present a compelling solution. Like a government ID provider, a trusted entity verifies the user’s age and generates a cryptographic proof confirming they are over the required age. Websites only need to check the proof, not the excess personal data, ensuring privacy while keeping minors at the gates. No centralized data storage is required, alleviating the burden on platforms such as Google, Meta, and WhatsApp and eliminating the risk of data breaches. Recent: How zero-knowledge proofs can make AI fairerAdopting and enforcing ZKPs at scaleZKPs aren’t a silver bullet. They can be complex to implement. The notion of “don’t trust, verify,” proven by indisputable mathematics, may cause some regulatory skepticism. Policymakers may hesitate to trust cryptographic proofs over visible ID verification. There are occasions when companies may need to disclose personal information to authorities, such as during an investigation into financial crimes or government inquiries. This would challenge ZKPs, whose very intention is for platforms not to hold this data in the first place.ZKPs also struggle with scalability and performance, being somewhat computationally intensive and tricky to program. Efficient implementation techniques are being explored, and breakthroughs, such as the Noir programming language, are making ZKPs more accessible to developers, driving the adoption of secure, privacy-first solutions. A safer, smarter future for age verificationGoogle’s move to adopt ZKPs for age verification is a promising signal that mainstream platforms are beginning to embrace privacy-preserving technologies. But to fully realize the potential of ZKPs, we need more than isolated solutions locked into proprietary ecosystems. Crypto-native wallets can go further. Open-source and permissionless blockchain-based systems offer interoperability, composability, and programmable identity. With a single proof, users can access a range of services across the open web — no need to start from scratch every time, or trust a single provider (Google) with their credentials.ZKPs flip the script on online identity — proving what matters, without exposing anything else. They protect user privacy, help platforms stay compliant, and block minors from restricted content, all without creating new honeypots of sensitive data.Google’s adoption of ZKPs shows mainstream momentum is building. But to truly transform digital identity, we must embrace crypto-native, decentralized systems that give users control over what they share and who they are online.In an era defined by surveillance, ZKPs offer a better path forward — one that’s secure, private, and built for the future.Opinion by: Andre Omietanski, General Counsel, and Amal Ibraymi, Legal Counsel at Aztec Labs.This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.