Here's a general question, are these vulnerabilities hitting Linux more than BSDs due to hit being a larger target or because its architecture is less secure by design?
2. Bsds don’t have the same optimizations that Linux has. Bsds generally try to pursue corrrectness
That being said there were just a bunch of vulnerabilities in freebsd
macOS has had its own dirty cow attack and I know there’s for sure more memory ones just based on the way the xnu kernel works.
So no Linux isn’t really worse per say
- more people are using it (assuming macos is in its own bucket perhaps) - bigger surface areas (esp NetBSD has in my limited understanding just less stuff that can go boom) - more churn, ie more new stuff than can be buggy released more often.
Of course, because of that, more eyes are on Linux, so I'm not sure where that security tradeoff is.
BSDs are an actual fork of UNIX from the 90s. Linux is a kernel whose code is not forked from UNIX. The userland is most often GNU, which stands for GNU's Not Unix.