> URL: http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/rsa/
> Block reason: Violence/Hate/Racism
So... what exactly is loyalty.org all about?
http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/
That's the most controversial thing about the page. In my view it's not a big deal to have that stance but some people don't like others who rock the boat when it comes to the status quo.
For what it's worth, I enjoyed the puzzle when I completed it three years ago. A practical exercise cracking the RSA keys followed by a small classic code breaking puzzle.
If 90% of the company employees only use IE and MS Word and are actually likely to install malware, and the last 10% are software engineers/data analysts/numerical simulation people, the latter are gonna have to work within/around these types of constraints.
I don't know where you work, but off-hand I would postulate that working at "such places" also has advantages over where you work (e.g. better work-life balance, living in an area where property prices are not insane, etc.). As I said, we find different optima in these tradeoffs.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=88_(number)&oldid...
The Heninger et al. paper explains quite a lot about where the underlying problems came from, most often inadequately seeded PRNGs in embedded devices. As the linked article mentions, other subsequent papers have also analyzed variants of this technique and so there's not much secret left about it.
If people are interested in learning about the impact of common factors on the security of RSA, I created a puzzle based on this which you can try out, which also includes an explanation of the issue for programmers who are less familiar with the mathematical context: http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/rsa/
Notably, my puzzle uses a small set of keys so you can do "easy" pairwise GCD calculations rather than needing an efficient n-way algorithm as described here (which becomes increasingly relevant as the number of keys in question grows).