Dominic Williams, founder of DFINITY, has publicly accused NEAR Protocol of deploying proprietary technology without authorization in its NEAR Intents platform. The allegations, aired on October 22, 2026, center on threshold ECDSA algorithms originally developed for the Internet Computer blockchain. According to Williams, NEAR incorporated DFINITY's research into its cross-chain infrastructure without proper authorization or attribution, raising questions that span intellectual property rights, blockchain security, and competition among decentralized networks.

DFINITY's Cryptographic Research at the Center of the Dispute

The disputed technology involves ECDSA additive key derivation and presigning algorithms documented in a DFINITY research paper published in April 2022. Written by cryptographers Jens Groth and Victor Shoup, the paper examines techniques for improving the efficiency and security of distributed digital signatures. DFINITY originally developed the related technology to support interoperability between the Internet Computer and Ethereum.

Threshold ECDSA enables multiple computers to jointly generate cryptographic signatures without any single participant controlling the complete private key. This design helps blockchain applications authorize transactions across different networks while reducing dependence on centralized custodians. Distributed signing of this kind underpins cross-chain platforms such as NEAR Intents, which rely on joint signatures to authorize transactions across networks, making the alleged reuse central to the dispute. Williams asserts that DFINITY's implementation can accelerate certain signing operations by approximately three times compared with alternative approaches, and argues that NEAR Intents benefited from these improvements without obtaining appropriate permission.

Williams Questions NEAR's Decentralization Claims

Beyond the intellectual property concerns, Williams challenged the security and decentralization of NEAR's implementation. He alleged that NEAR deployed the contested technology across approximately eight servers, raising concerns about the distribution of signing authority. NEAR's technical disclosures, however, describe a broader multiparty computation network involving 17 independent operators. The spread of signing authority across independent operators is a standard yardstick for decentralization in cross-chain systems, which places the discrepancy at the heart of the technical disagreement.

Williams further alleged that a former DFINITY employee contributed to transferring the technology into NEAR's infrastructure. Those claims remain unverified, and no independent determination of misconduct has emerged. He also pointed to GitHub development records suggesting that NEAR has been modifying its signing algorithms, interpreting the changes as a possible response to concerns surrounding DFINITY's technology.

Potential Legal Implications for Blockchain Development

Williams warned that the alleged unauthorized use could carry legal consequences and negatively affect DFINITY and Internet Computer stakeholders. The existence of publicly available cryptographic research, however, does not automatically establish exclusive ownership or infringement Any legal dispute would require examination of applicable intellectual property protections, licensing agreements, and implementation details.

NEAR had not issued a formal public response to the specific allegations in the reporting reviewed. The key open questions are whether NEAR addresses the accusations directly, whether the matter progresses toward formal legal proceedings, and how the differing accounts of NEAR's signing network are reconciled.

The dispute highlights growing tensions surrounding blockchain innovation as competing networks develop cross-chain infrastructure. Its outcome could influence how cryptocurrency projects approach cryptographic research, software licensing, and technical attribution.

Source: CryptoMeter io