DFINITY Founder Accuses NEAR Protocol of IP Theft Over Crypto Tech

DFINITY founder Dominic Williams has publicly accused NEAR Protocol of intellectual property theft, alleging that the NEAR Intents service utilizes proprietary cryptographic technology developed exclusively for the Internet Computer. 

The serious claim centers on a threshold signature scheme, sparking a major dispute between the two blockchain ecosystems.

Key Takeaways

• Dominic Williams alleges NEAR integrated proprietary ECDSA technology.
• The cryptographic algorithms were originally licensed exclusively for the Internet Computer.
• NEAR Protocol has not yet issued a public response to the claims.

The Core Allegation

The dispute centers on the DFINITY founder who accuses NEAR Intents of using its proprietary cryptographic technology for cross chain asset custody and swaps. 

According to Williams, a key component of NEAR Intents relies on ECDSA additive key derivation and presigning algorithms described in a 2021 cryptography paper by DFINITY researchers Jens Groth and Victor Shoup.

Williams explains that this presignature design speeds up transaction signing by roughly three times without weakening security. It allows multiple computers to generate a public key and sign transactions without any single node holding the full private key. 

He argues that DFINITY developed these specific algorithms for integrating the Internet Computer with Ethereum, and the technology was licensed only for use with the Internet Computer.

Read also: Quantus Network QTC Now Available on NEAR Protocol

Personnel and Decentralization Claims

Beyond the code itself, Williams raised concerns about the personnel involved and the network's architecture. He alleged that NEAR hired a former DFINITY employee, dismissed in the summer of 2021, to lead the related work. 

He tied these former staffers to multiple attempts that harmed the project, though he did not provide specific public documentation regarding those incidents.

Williams also questioned the network's decentralization. He stated that the Internet Computer runs its threshold signing on a subnet of roughly 50 independent node operators. In contrast, he claims the near intents DFINITY comparison shows NEAR relies on about eight servers. 

He used this discrepancy to argue that NEAR's marketing overstates how distributed its system actually is and highlighted a potential backdoor risk.

Check out the latest cryptocurrencies news only on Bitrue. Don’t have an account yet? Sign up here!

Legal Implications and Market Reaction

The DFINITY founder accuses NEAR Protocol of attempting to cover its tracks. Williams alleges that NEAR recently attempted on GitHub to downgrade the algorithm to a slower version. He frames this timing as an attempt to swap in a different algorithm rather than a routine upgrade.

Williams stated that the matter carries civil and criminal legal implications and that a resolution must happen. He argued that NEAR is leveraging this technology to prematurely launch chain abstraction products, which damages the interests of the DFINITY and ICP ecosystems.

Despite the serious nature of the NEAR Protocol ip theft accusation, the market reaction was relatively muted. The NEAR token reportedly rose roughly 5% on the same day the allegations were published.

Read also: Is NEAR a Good Investment? Market Analysis and Sentiment

An Unverified Dispute

It is important to note that these are currently unilateral allegations from Williams. He has cited GitHub records as evidence, but the public has yet to see formal licensing paperwork or a comprehensive audit.

NEAR Foundation has not issued a public rebuttal, denial, or explanation regarding its signing architecture's history. 

Consequently, it cannot yet be concluded that NEAR has committed technical misappropriation. The dispute remains subject to further verification and potential legal proceedings.

Read also: XMR Aids NEAR Intents $3.8M Exploit Recovery: What Happened and What Changed

FAQ

Who is accusing NEAR Protocol?

Dominic Williams, the founder of DFINITY and the Internet Computer, made the allegations.

What technology is in question?

Williams alleges NEAR used a proprietary threshold ECDSA signature scheme described in DFINITY research papers.

Has NEAR responded?

As of the reports, NEAR Foundation has not issued a public response to the allegations.

Did the NEAR price drop after the accusation?

No. Reports indicate the NEAR token actually rose roughly 5% on the day the claims were made public.

Disclaimer: The views expressed belong exclusively to the author and do not reflect the views of this platform. This platform and its affiliates disclaim any responsibility for the accuracy or suitability of the information provided. It is for informational purposes only and not intended as financial or investment advice.