[micaksica]

This post seems lacking in the data required to make such a claim; I do not understand how it has gained so much traction.

Where is the actual research, and where are the probable identified candidates? Did I miss a data analysis part somewhere that explained the methodology, and probable attribution to actual people? This appears to be a basic string search of the code and some simple syntax analysis.

There are learning algorithms for stylometry, and they can probably be adapted to code. This article appears to state that "it might be possible to use these anomalies as clues", but does not elaborate on, how, why, or what any hypothesis is other than this.

[exo762]

Haven't analyzed author's claims, but in general programmer identification is solved problem:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMa04HovKfs [De-anonymizing programmers 32c3]

[akerro]

My first thoughts were about the demo you linked and about this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xipI-0HU010

[micaksica]

Awesome. Thanks for this. I missed this one.

[CoryG89]

Looks to me like the author is posting initial findings (and if I am reading this right, withholding some).

It doesn't look like a crazy amount of time/resources have gone in, but it looks like a basic proof of concept to me. Perhaps it will get the ball rolling and someone else who reads this will figure it out.