1 month ago
9011
Since the Department of Justice released another batch of the Jeffrey Epstein files to the public, many people have been interpreting some of the correspondence between the disgraced financier and his associates, among other things.
One of the interpretations concerns Bitcoin, with an X user with the name Patric L Riley writing a post that implied that Epstein had a lot of influence on Bitcoin’s development.
Riley wrote, “At the time this letter was written, there were around 12,000 commits to Bitcoin’s code. Today, there are 47,583 commits to Bitcoin’s code. That means that 74.79% of the Bitcoin core development and code was committed after Jeffrey Epstein took over the defacto senior management role as benefactor. He may not have been ‘Satoshi’, but he was absolutely running the executive direction of Bitcoin on behalf of Mossad.
What are the odds that there are backdoors built into Bitcoin’s code at this point? Probably about 100%.”
Riley made these assertions while sharing a screenshot of an email correspondence between the former head of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Media Lab, Joi Ito, and Epstein.
He also tried to link the event to the FBI recovery of the Bitcoin ransom for the 2021 Continental Pipeline hack, writing, “P.S. Ever wonder how the Bitcoin ransome for the 2021 Continental Pipeline hack was ‘Recovered’ by the FBI? I didn’t.”
However, the assertions seem to conflate indirect academic funding with operational control and highlight a misunderstanding in both Bitcoin’s governance structure and how open-source software development operates.
What is the MIT connection?
The newly released Epstein files reveal that the late financier donated $850,000 to MIT between 2002 and 2017, with $525,000 directed to the MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative.
In 2015, when the Bitcoin Foundation faced bankruptcy, MIT’s DCI became the institutional home for several Bitcoin Core developers, including Wladimir van der Laan, Gavin Andresen, and Cory Fields.
Ito resigned in September 2019 after The New Yorker published an investigation into his attempts to conceal financial contributions from Epstein. The scandal exposed how Epstein’s donations helped fund developer salaries during a major funding gap, though the money flowed indirectly through MIT’s institutional mechanisms.
Documents released last month show Ito thanking Epstein in a 2017 email titled “Digital Currency Initiative,” writing that gift funds “allowed us to move quickly and win this round” in recruiting Bitcoin developers.
However, the notion that these constituted Epstein holding a senior management position in Bitcoin or its foundation is false because Bitcoin’s governance is decentralized, designed to resist influence from any single funding source.
The three developers who joined MIT reportedly had no knowledge of the source of the funds and were paid by MIT. Multiple organizations now fund Bitcoin development transparently, including the Human Rights Foundation’s Bitcoin Development Fund and non-profit organizations like Brink.
Is the Bitcoin backdoor allegation true?
Riley’s claim that backdoors exist in Bitcoin’s code with “about 100%” probability rests on a misunderstanding of how the FBI recovered the Bitcoin stolen in the Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack that occurred in 2021.
Although the FBI didn’t share a full breakdown of how it recovered the funds, it mentioned that it tracked the transactions until it got to a specific address for which the FBI had its private keys, enabling them to retrieve the funds. There was no mention of a vulnerability in Bitcoin’s code that was exploited.
Bitcoin’s open-source nature means thousands of developers worldwide can review every line of code.
X users have repeatedly called out Riley on this point, with one stating, “Bitcoin Core is fully open-source with thousands of independent contributors, rigorous peer review, reproducible builds, PGP-signed merges since late 2015, constant auditing by global developers, and no credible evidence of undetected malicious changes despite a decade of intense scrutiny.”
The user also threw shade at Riley, asking him to channel his focus on the people abusing children.
A networker, not a controller
The newly unsealed Epstein files show that he was more embedded in Bitcoin’s early circles than previously reported, funding infrastructure projects and engaging with people now considered industry architects.
One of the files showed that in 2014, Epstein invested in Blockstream, one of Bitcoin’s most important infrastructure firms, through an oversubscribed $18 million funding round.
However, Blockstream’s CEO, Adam Back, has denied that Epstein invested in the company, writing on X, “In 2014, during Blockstream’s seed-round investor roadshow, the company was introduced to then MIT Media Lab director Joi Ito. Subsequently, Blockstream met with Jeffrey Epstein, who was described at the time as a limited partner in Ito’s fund. That fund later invested a minority stake in Blockstream. A few months later, Ito’s fund divested its Blockstream shares due to a potential conflict of interest and other concerns. Blockstream has no direct nor indirect financial connection with Jeffrey Epstein, or his estate.”
In 2011, correspondence shows attempts to introduce Epstein to Bitcoin developers Gavin Andresen and Amir Taaki, though Taaki later wrote that he declined Epstein’s investment interest.
In 2016, Epstein pitched a plan to a Saudi royal advisor involving the creation of two digital currencies, writing, “I have spoken to some of the founders of Bitcoin who are very excited”.
Epstein also reportedly discussed Bitcoin with Peter Thiel in 2014. However, no crypto wallets, blockchain transactions, or crypto-enabled crimes have emerged in Epstein’s records.
Don’t just read crypto news. Understand it. Subscribe to our newsletter. It's free.
English (US)