That is the precise level of college bred misconception that we face.....................there is no such thing as a "security model" for EITHER operating system.....................they were designed before security was even thought about, before major networks, before the internet................................
Incorrect. It's dead on. Think about it for a second.

That statement I made is nothing more than saying "Both have their flaws, but it isn't my job to make you fix either side.". I agree that we need to start from scratch, completely. But you are attempting to bash and put words into my mouth that I never said.

Every single OS has a security flaw in it's capability, that's a universal. I don't care if it's RISC, OpenBSD, or NT 4.0 It's going to have a vulnerablity due to structure/internal code. You are trying to play semantics with me, and I don't appreciate it. "Security model" "security system" "security anything" is going to have a hole in it, no matter what.

I don't care if it was meant for multimedia mp3. I don't care if it was meant for anything BUT security. That isn't the point. The point is, and especially since we are in a security forum, is that any model created by mankind (computer or not) is going to have inherit flaws that make it exploitable to someone's benefit or detriment.

That's undeniable.