Unless I misread the article, the key was stored in the NVRAM and not the TrustZone.

IIRC, the article stated that if the key(s) had been stored in the TrustZone then the data would have been irrecoverable.

Good catch; it was somewhat ambiguous in the report.

Think of a genome as 3 billion character sequence. "Sequencing" a genome gives you the actual content of the sequence. Think: "....GAAAAGATACCCACAGAGATTACAAAAC...." (I'll call this string FOO) Until recently, sequencing an entire genome was really, really expensive. I'm not sure what the price is now, but I know that it has dropped considerably.

When you sample a genome, you're checking for one specific string. Traditionally this is done by mixing a sample of the DNA with an enzyme that breaks apart a specific DNA sequence and then measuring whether the size of the DNA molecules have changed. Take the string that I mentioned above (FOO). Suppose that I mix it with an enzyme that cleaves along "GATTACA" such that "GATTACA" becomes "GAT| |TACA". If I mix a DNA sample containing the string FOO with the enzyme I just mentioned, then the molecule would be split into: "....GAAAAGATACCCACAGAGAT| |TACAAAAC...." If I mix a DNA sample that does _not_ contain FOO with the enzyme, no change occurs.

You know when you watch CSI shows* and the DNA evidence is presented as a bunch of light and dark bands? Those are produced by mixing the suspect's DNA sample with a standard cocktail of enzymes, treating them so that the DNA molecules are electrically charged (DNA might already have a charge, not sure), placing them at one end of a container of a standard gelatin with known pore size, and applying an electric field for a standard amount of time. The cocktail of enzymes cleaves the DNA at multiple different substrings and breaks down the DNA strands into multiple smaller substrings. Different size molecules will progress through the gelatin at different rates, so you can effectively compare two people's DNA to see whether the substrings match. You _don't_ know the person's genetic sequence, just whether or not his or her's DNA contains the same substrings as the DNA of the person that you're comparing it to.

* I'm assuming those TV shows present the DNA evidence this way. I don't watch them.

Disclaimer: I'm not a biochemist by any stretch. This is based on my memory from school, so don't take my explanation as absolute truth :-)

There are three techniques in play here: Sequencing, fingerprinting, and SNP sampling.

You have described sequencing and fingerprinting. These services use SNP sampling.

Sampling has been described several places in this thread so I won’t repeat that here;

I think that you're confusing "Land Rover" and "Land Cruiser".

Land Rover vehicles are made by Jaguar Land Rover. The term "Land Rover" usually refers to either the Land Rover Defender (a bulky, tractor-looking SUV that isn't legal in the USA* due to a lack of safety features and emissions controls) or a variety of luxury SUVs that are remarkably good off-road but suffer from questionable reliability.

Land Cruisers are made by Toyota. The term "Land Cruiser" can refer to two totally separate Toyota vehicles. The J20, J40, and J70 models are known for being incredibly sturdy, reliable, and versatile vehicles, while the J50, J60, J80, J100, and J200 models are luxury SUVs; the J200 has a base MSRP of USD$86,000. Toyota doesn't sell the rugged, non-luxury models in the USA, although unlike in the case of the Land Rover Defender this may be more due to market analysis than legality.

There's no way to know from the original comment whether they were driving a rugged Land Cruiser or a luxury Land Cruiser. I've never driven either of them, but I'm sure that they behave very differently.

*Yes, I know that the person who commented specified that they were in Norway. I'm just adding the bit about Land Rovers not being legal in the USA (with a few exceptions) so that Americans like myself won't be scratching their heads trying to remember what Defenders look like :-)

I was in a J95 - in some markets called the Prado. (Basically less rugged than the 70 series, but still at the fairly utilitarian end of the range - a close relative of the J80 - beam axle at the rear, independent up front, lockers rear&center.)

It is more a matter of physics than utilitarian/luxury, I suspect - 4x4s ride tall (my roof rack is 6'8" above ground), so to behave properly with a significant load on the roof, you'd need lots of mass to keep the centre of gravity low while also requiring suspension stiff enough to be unusable to keep the roll in check.

Defenders aren't legal in the USA? I have been a scofflaw for the last ten years?

Sorry, you're totally wrong about that. Rest-of-world (ROW) Defenders are absolutely legal in the US, as are any vehicle > 25 years old with original spec motor. Also legal are North American Spec (NAS) Defenders, which were imported for three years in the 90s.

Source: I am the co-founder of NAS-ROW, the Defender forum. https://nas-row.com

That's why I said "with a few exceptions". There are legal Defenders in the USA, but they are uncommon enough that I didn't want people thinking of Discoveries or LR2/3/4's when I described a "tractor-like" vehicle. Next time I'll be more specific.

P.S. That's a neat site! I'm glad that there's an American Defender community. Defenders are beautiful vehicles, and on the rare occasions that I see one I always try to get a picture with it :-)

For any Americans who are now curious, what Land Rover Defenders look like is.. kind of like the Bollinger B1 :)

I really like Ubuntu, but there are two things that I would recommend changing/fixing:

1. Replace the default PDF reader with something faster. It takes the default PDF viewer (in 17.04) 10+ seconds to open files that MuPDF can open in 2 seconds. MuPDF is very basic, so it might not be the best option for the default viewer, but hopefully there's something faster than the current default.

2. Allow the software center app to request sudo privileges when installing .deb files from the GUI. When I set up my most recent Ubuntu desktop I downloaded the Chrome deb from Google and then tried to install it by double clicking the file in the GUI file browser. The software center app opened and tried to install it, but instead of asking me for sudo privileges (which I had), it failed to install. My options were A) install it from the command line with sudo or B) install gdebi and use that to install the deb from the GUI.

As someone who is comfortable working in Linux, it's not a big deal for me to install a deb from the command line. The inability to install a deb by double clicking it would be a showstopper/major issue for someone who is brand new to Linux and isn't trying to "learn Linux".

P.S. There's an argument to be made that people should just learn to use the command line, but Ubuntu's slogan is "Linux for human beings". Besides, the worst way to introduce someone to the wonderful world of FOSS software is to give them a headache while they're trying to set up their computer :-)

Zathura can use mupdf as a backend and has much better bindings/features compared to mupdf, it also supports other ebook formats.

Still pretty keyboard driven and not an optimal choice for ubuntu.

Maybe ubuntu should have a more minimal spin with i3wm and apps like zathura.

I second that! The i3wm rocks, but it's kind of a pain to set up. Many applications expect certain GUI elements to be present, and a lot of "It Just Works" aspects of Ubuntu (e.g. hotkeys on laptop media keyboards working) are built into the desktop environment and have to be reconfigured for i3wm.

This is super trivial just figure out the right command to run and what the key is called and bindsym key command.

If you don't know what they key is called run xev and press the key and it will show you.

If you don't know what command to run google do whatever command line linux.