Leaked Chats Rock Bitcoin: Hard Fork Proposal Threatens Immutability
A recent leak printed late Thursday has ignited probably the most charged governance dispute in Bitcoin for the reason that SegWit2x period. In a report by The Rage, journalist L0la L33tz printed messages attributed to Bitcoin Knots maintainer Luke Dashjr that define a tough fork idea introducing a trusted multisignature “committee” empowered to retroactively alter information on the blockchain so as to take away illicit content material, with the removals cryptographically attested by zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs).
Hard Fork Puts Bitcoin Immutability At Risk
“Text messages shared with The Rage present that the Knots maintainer is contemplating a hardfork to implement a trusted multisig committee that may retrospectively alter the blockchain to take away illicit content material,” the article states. It was up to date on September 25, 2025.
L33tz summarized the stakes starkly in her accompanying X thread: “This phrase has been drastically inflated through the years, however what Luke is proposing right here is an assault on Bitcoin.” She added {that a} onerous fork “that might implement a trusted committee with the facility to retroactively alter the blockchain goes too far,” arguing that such a design “would flip Bitcoin right into a permissioned community.”
The printed chat excerpts present Dashjr exploring a buried-state modification approach supposed to take care of the danger that youngster sexual abuse materials (CSAM) could be mined right into a block. “I’m attempting to give you mitigation methods for the danger CSAM will get mined — so my thought is after a block is recognized as having CSAM, flag that one tx and use a ZKP for it,” one message reads, adopted by: “Technically a hardfork, however because it’s buried, must be secure,” and “Probably would have a multisig sign-off on every ZKP.”
The leak lands amid a year-long coverage schism over inscriptions/ordinals, “spam” filtering, and the rising affect of Bitcoin Knots, a distribution maintained by Dashjr that ships stricter default insurance policies for what a node relays or mines. Although debates about content filtering predate 2025, the notion of an specific on-chain remediation mechanism ratified by a committee has provoked unusually sharp pushback from outstanding business figures.
Reactions From X
BitMEX Research referred to as the concept “increasingly more like an assault on Bitcoin’s key censorship resistance traits.”
Blockstream CEO Adam Back reacted: “Ugh. far worse than i may’ve imagined. Skipped previous slippery slope arguments, @lukedashjr / knots plan is to leap straight to the censorship tech that myself and @csuwildcat have been particularly warning about with authorized citations from prior web instances.”
Abra founder Bill Barhydt warned that “Bitcoin War 2 appears imminent,” including: “If onerous fork rumors are true, I worry my maxi mates have purchased right into a narrative that would result in a bait-and-switch by a small faction (e.g., one rogue developer)… Bottom line: Censoring the mempool is a nasty concept. Let payment markets do their job.”
JAN3’s Samson Mow urged restraint and an extended time-horizon for protocol adjustments: “There exists a 3rd faction that isn’t Core or Knots. We merely need Bitcoin to be safe, unchanging, and conservative. We imagine improvement must be framed on a centuries-long timescale, with any proposed change approached with utmost care and warning. Primum non nocere.” In a separate message he reassured customers: “There’s no want to select a facet… You are the community.”
Will JPEGs Burn Bitcoin To The Ground?
L33tz’s article additionally asserts that attorneys are making ready public letters advocating for sanctions concentrating on illicit content material on Bitcoin and that Dashjr has been concerned “behind the scenes,” although, based on the article, “feels [it is] higher to remain out of [it] publicly on recommendation of counsel.” The piece argues that formalizing any committee with authority to rewrite historical past would “successfully erase Bitcoin’s censorship resistance” and will expose node operators to legal responsibility if they do not want to implement removals—considerations that contact the core of Bitcoin’s immutability ethos.
If applied, a buried-state rollback ratified by a trusted sign-off—even one paired with ZKPs—would mark a decisive departure from Bitcoin’s consensus mannequin, the place reorgs are emergent, permissionless, and economically disincentivized past shallow depth. The leaked idea suggests memorializing a special-case pathway to excise information post-confirmation, which critics worry may develop into a vector for compelled takedowns, politicized censorship, or regulatory seize over time. That threat profile is exactly why some are labeling the proposal an assault on Bitcoin’s “key censorship resistance traits.”
As of publication, Dashjr has not posted a public technical specification or BIP for the mechanism described within the leaked messages, and no activation pathway has been formally proposed. But the response has been quick and polarizing.
“No matter what facet you stand on on this debate… proposing the implementation of such a decree within the type of a hardfork that might implement a trusted committee with the facility to retroactively alter the blockchain goes too far,” L33tz wrote, concluding: “Burning Bitcoin to the bottom over JPEGs shouldn’t be value it.”
At press time, BTC traded at $109,247.
