The blockchain scaling venture helmed by Jimmy Nguyen and Craig Wright has built its entire operation around Bitcoin Cash—yet the software powering its security infrastructure remains locked away. Nak
The blockchain scaling venture helmed by Jimmy Nguyen and Craig Wright has built its entire operation around Bitcoin Cash—yet the software powering its security infrastructure remains locked away. Nakasendo, nChain's SDK and key generation tool, maintains a GitHub presence that amounts to little more than a façade. Users who click into the "source code" folder discover only licensing documents and README files, a hollowed-out repository masquerading as transparency.
While developers often establish bare repositories as placeholders for future code drops, nChain's situation differs fundamentally. The license they've attached disqualifies the entire project from any claim to openness. Bitcoin Cash itself descended from Bitcoin, the original open-source cryptocurrency. Yet the key generation software that Wright patented separately exists in a legal gray zone—theoretically compatible with Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash blockchains, though the actual implementation remains hidden from scrutiny.
Rather than adopting established licensing frameworks like the MIT Open Source License, nChain authored a custom agreement: the "Open Bitcoin Cash License." Section 2(A) and 2(B) grant minimal rights, but condition "f" introduces a critical restriction: "Blockchain/Platform Limitation. The licenses granted in sections 2(A) & 2(B) extend only to the Software or derivative works (such as applications using the Software) that you create that operate on the Bitcoin Cash ("BCH") blockchain."
Wright, most notable for his failed attempts to establish himself as Satoshi Nakamoto, has pursued aggressive patent strategies around cryptocurrency technology. Ethereum's Vitalik Buetrin questioned the patent's validity via Twitter, arguing it resembled "public master key-based deterministic wallets" that emerged in 2013. The patent does bear similarities—though its distinction lies in generating a second private key using fragments of another node's public key combined with the initial private key. Whether this specific mechanism predates nChain remains unclear.
The credibility question deepened when MiningPool reported earlier this year that Wright's academic work bore remarkable resemblance to previously published research—essentially copying substantial portions wholesale.
Regardless of the technology's actual merit, neither nChain's license nor its approach qualifies as open source under any rigorous standard. According to Opensource.org, which bases its definition on the Debian Free Software Guidelines, several non-negotiable principles must be met. The first prohibits software from discriminating against persons or groups—and nChain's license discriminates against every blockchain advocate not developing specifically for Bitcoin Cash.
More damaging are principles six, eight, nine, and ten. Principle six forbids restricting software use within any particular industry. Principle eight bars tying rights to specific software distributions. Principle nine prevents restrictions on accompanying software. But principle ten delivers the knockout punch: licensing provisions cannot depend on individual technologies or interface styles. "No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface."
Nakasendo violates all of these requirements. Requiring Bitcoin Cash exclusivity directly contradicts the technology-neutral mandate.
The naming itself constitutes deliberate misdirection. Calling something "open" implies accessibility and transparency—standards this license clearly fails to meet. nChain's right to keep their work proprietary remains unquestioned legally, but branding restrictive software as "open" crosses into dishonesty.
The deeper concern stems from the software's critical function. Wright's patent covers key generation mechanisms—the foundation of user security. When source code remains unavailable for independent review, users cannot verify that their keys are generated safely and securely. They must place blind faith in nChain's competence and integrity. The repository offers only an .exe file without portable alternatives, increasing vulnerability to malware installation and persistence.
Regardless of current intentions, companies make errors constantly. Without accessible code, nobody can assess whether the key generation process is secure, novel, or potentially compromised. Experts on Reddit and elsewhere have already raised these issues.
An additional ambiguity compounds the problem: what exactly constitutes Bitcoin Cash? Roger Ver insists Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin itself. The potential for future hard forks looms. Should another split occur, what mechanism determines which chain represents the "true" Bitcoin Cash? Proponents reject hashpower and longest-chain assumptions, raising the question: does nChain's interpretation carry decisive weight?
The company's enforcement strategy remains opaque. Presumably violations would trigger legal proceedings, but nChain hasn't clarified their position. Contact attempts through email and social media produced no response. Their careers page lists both "open source and proprietary technology" among their work, suggesting internal inconsistency or calculated ambiguity.
One historical parallel warrants consideration. Satoshi Nakamoto chose radical openness, allowing collaborative development and community-driven improvement. Bitcoin's early vulnerabilities were identified and fixed through this collaborative model. Had Satoshi imposed restrictions or demanded developers follow only his specifications, cryptocurrencies wouldn't exist in their current form.
Wright now operates in closed-source conditions—fundamentally incompatible with Satoshi's philosophy, regardless of his claims to that identity. The "Open Bitcoin Cash License" represents not openness but the opposite: a walled garden masquerading as transparency.
