Also, its impossible for Hal to have created this message - Bitcoin signmessages did not exist at the time. Whether sold or not, the message was clearly signed by someone after Hal's passing (or at a point where he could no longer directly use a computer).
Matt's thread continues:
To clarify, or that *anyone* purchased (or otherwise acquired) Hal's keys. Not strictly Martin.

only proves someone with access to Hal Finney's private key (not Satoshi's) signed the claimed message. Also they misspelled his name.
reply
also what i don't understand is martin says that
The following signature
HM7vpPSUbNsfDHRX6gv8xxWcVNHEc/3pOk0YrVehaGoUdbWizznfzOdELkLd1EjSXsW1oE5vHAkNAPzrAVzhuoI=
decrypts to: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This Transaction was made by Paul Leroux to Hal Finney on January 12, 2009 #bitcoin
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
but digital signatures do not "decrypt" to anything. what is the actually message that is signed by the signature ?
reply
This is the signed message. Shakreli is a noob.
This Transaction was made by Paul Leroux to Hal Finney on January 12, 2009 #bitcoin
reply
Disreputable source. Feel free to ignore.
reply
The content in the message is not proven by the signature, because the private key is Hal's not Satoshi's. But it does prove someone signed a message with Hal's private key.
reply