I see many threads on here discussing Linux security, (heck, I've been involved in a few) and one thing is very clear... no one seems to know exactly what Linux security is.
Yeah, MAC ACLs have been added... but no major commercial distributions utilize them... should they be considered?
What about security levels? Removing the root account? Sticky bits? A trusted facilities manual? More finely grained DAC?
Some say anything Linux can do to be consider as part of its security model.
Some say everything specifically included in the kernel.org source to be considered part of Linux.
And still some say only things included with commercial distros should really be considered.
The problem is, all of these arguments have merit, but make a productive discussion about Linux security very difficult.
My personal beliefs are a combination of the above. It must be included in kernel.org and (this is important, because kernel.org is getting more and more comprehensive all the time) must at least be documented in a major commercial distro. Otherwise the assurances and consequently all potential security advantages are lost. (at least in a corporate setting)
Anyhow, curious about your thoughts.