Talk:Security-focused operating system

message: This page is more a list of security features in a selected list of operating systems than the definition of a concept. 
You cannot exclude by definition of the "security focused", operating systems that are not only security focused but have taken all the measures to prove it with a certification. 
The criteria "increasing security as a major goal" is not easy to document and to beserve. All operating systems have as goal reliability and security.  But having a goal is not sufficient to ensure security.  In the article there is no reference to statements or documents proving that the listed products really have security as a major goal. And some big market actors have not been mentioned, even if they publicly stated their commitment to increase security.  
PROPOSAL:  
1) Redefine the criteria of security focus (for example, the availability of advanced security features or an architecure/design that favours security:  this is documented and can more easily be referenced)  
3) Review the list of OS , include also the certified products, and mainstream OS which also have interesting and advanced security focused functions.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cth027 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change or fundamental review required 

message: This article does not mention SELinux (Security-Enhanced Linux by NSA)
:Now it's mentioned --Doc aberdeen 16:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  In regards to the most recent edit (before the one I just made) to the article, which added "Linux" at the top then went on to describe SELinux as a "feature" - it's technically a module not a feature. That's just the way the kernel works. I don't really need to say more since you can just check out it's wiki entry. I'm gonna change the wording to module, maybe add a few other points then I got to go for the day. See the following articles for clarity: SELinux, Loadable_kernel_module & Linux_Security_Modules. Also, I'm not sure how to phrase the edit or what links to include? Should I rephrase "feature" to "module" or to "security module" -- with link to respective article, of course... or leave it and just add a link... or what, someone help!  NewGuy1001(talk) 17:08, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I make the edit. Please tell me what you think; feedback welcome! Specifically, I clarified some murky points: distinguished Linux from Linux Kernel, feature from module, module from security modules (in the Linux kernel ie. LSM), and lastly clarified the circumstances under which SELinux was actually integrated with the kernel (not Linux itself ie. the first point). That is all the time I have for today! Hope I helped, even a little! Carry on Penguins! NewGuy1001 (talk) 17:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  SELinux 

message: This should mention rsbac.
:Now it's mentioned --Doc aberdeen 16:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RSBAC 

message: Shouldn't it be listed here too?
:Add it then --Doc aberdeen 16:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about Trustix 

message: Shouldn't the article be "Security-focused operating system" with a dash? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frap (talk • contribs) 23:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that page redirects here. --Doc aberdeen 16:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Wouldn't it be better to call the article "List of security-focused operating systems" as the current name suggests that it is an article about the concept of security-focused operating systems? - Koweja (talk) 20:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Viewing this article is akin to opening up an encyclopaedia, looking up an article, and finding an index instead. Perhaps this article should get the "needs expansion" tag? A greater in-depth discussion on why secure operating systems are beneficial, and the different approaches to achieve it, for example, would be great for this article! Songjin (talk) 07:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change 

message: At which point is it more secure to disable root and use the same password for the normal user and sudo? Can someone proof it. If not, I will delete this from the article. --Txt.file (talk) 00:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  sudo 

message: I think that the article should specifically state the "stable" branch of Debian as secure as distinct from the "testing" branch. Not that testing is insecure, but stable is the one you'd want if you have security in mind. Just a thought. NewGuy1001 (talk) 16:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Debian Clarity 

message: I see that this rather unique is only mentioned as an external link resource. Probably because the distro doesn't currently have a wiki entry, although it's lead developer does. I would really like to see Qubes added to this list as it is a strong security oriented OS.  I will work on a scholarly entry for it, maybe even give it a wiki entry as well in the coming days.. or maybe weeks as I am kind of busy. I'll try! Just give me time or better yet do it yourself/for me!
NewGuy1001 (talk) 17:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qubes OS 

message: Hi all,
The content of the article seems to be dominated by individual technical observations on specific OSs, almost entirely unsourced. It doesn't really develop what a "Security-focused operating system" is, and I think that it would be impossible to find a source saying that most of the OSs listed here are a "Security-focused operating system". For instance, we have a section on Solaris which opens by saying that, err, Solaris isn't actually security-focussed, then we go on to discuss its security features anyway. And that section is actually better sourced than the rest of the article, in that it has two primary sources showing formal accreditation - something which the lede says is different to what the article is supposed to talk about. I think this article really needs tightening up. Any suggestions? bobrayner (talk) 11:03, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research problems 

message: Apple's iOS is extremely secure, yet absent from the list. This is sad and IMO makes the list look bad.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evarlast (talk • contribs) 20:20, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  apple 

message: Pentoo - Gentoo based chines backtrack.
78.107.223.19 (talk) 22:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pentoo 

message: LIPS (lighweight portable security) - US Navy Secure Distributive for net-cafe on enemy's territories.
78.107.223.19 (talk) 22:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  LIPS 

message: The INTEGRITY RTOS - Real-Time Operating System
From inception, the INTEGRITY RTOS was designed so that embedded developers could ensure their applications met the highest possible requirements for security, reliability, and performance.
To achieve this, INTEGRITY uses hardware memory protection to isolate and protect embedded applications. Secure partitions guarantee each task the resources it needs to run correctly and fully protect the operating system and user tasks from errant and malicious code—including denial-of-service attacks, worms, and Trojan horses.
Unlike other memory-protected operating systems, INTEGRITY never sacrifices real-time performance for security and protection.
78.107.223.19 (talk) 22:41, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  RTOS 

message: REMnux -  A Linux Distribution for Reverse-Engineering Malware
78.107.223.19 (talk) 22:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  REMnux 

message: LynxSecure
Desktop Virtualization and Secure Client Virtualization Based on Military-Grade Technology
Secure virtualization for laptops, medical and data applications with LynxSecure separation kernel
LynxSecure's military-grade technology is now available for other markets such as medical, consumer, financial, industrial and communications. LynxSecure supports commonly available processor architectures, operating systems and applications, and offers the ultimate in protection, without interfering with the desired functionality of the device.
78.107.223.19 (talk) 22:46, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  LynxSecure from Lynuxworks 

message: santoku - Santoku is dedicated to mobile forensics, analysis, and security, and packaged in an easy to use, Open Source platform.
78.107.223.19 (talk) 22:48, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Santoku 

message: DEFT Linux 
DEFT 7 is based on the new Kernel 3 (Linux side) and the DART (Digital Advanced Response Toolkit) with the best freeware Windows Computer Forensic tools. It’s a new concept of Computer Forensic system that use LXDE as desktop environment and WINE for execute Windows tools under Linux and mount manager as tool for device management.
It is a very professional and stable system that includes an excellent hardware detection and the best free and open source applications dedicated to Incident Response, Cyber Intelligence and Computer Forensics.
DEFT is meant to be used by:
Military
Police
Investigators
IT Auditors
Individuals
78.107.223.19 (talk) 22:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  DEFT Linux 

message: Aegis Combat System
The Aegis Combat System is an integrated naval weapons system developed by the Missile and Surface Radar Division of RCA, and now produced by Lockheed Martin. It uses powerful computers and radars to track and guide weapons to destroy enemy targets.
78.107.223.19 (talk) 22:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aegis 

message: Can somebody please remove the redirect of Whonix from this page so a new article for the OS can be created. I pre-wrote an article on my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:WikiTryHardDieHard/sandbox2 --WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 00:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Have fun. bobrayner (talk) 12:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  @User:Bobrayner Thank you.--WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 19:20, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whonix New page and redirect 

message: Polippix and Mandragora need adding, see http://www.greycoder.com/anonymous-linux-distributions/
109.130.252.51 (talk) 12:38, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Polippix and Mandragora

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Security-focused operating system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/aix/library/au-openbsd.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:43, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I noticed this edit with the edit summary black box is a pentesting OS like kali linux, not a hardened system, Are security-focused operating systems limited to hardened systems? Should this list exclude pentesting operating systems? --Guy Macon (talk) 09:59, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet Another Question about list inclusion criteria 

message: I have tried to remove both Replicant and BSD, because both are merely General-Purpose OSes. With Replicant, replacing proprietary components with open ones does not make it "security-focused", also I've found the attack at Samsung in the repicant entry to be somewhat dubious. BSD is just an general-purpose OS. I've also found the inclusion of Windows Server in headless mode to be questionable. Sure, there might be less security issues in this mode, but this is highly speculative. Plus, headless mode is very common in almost any server software... --2003:CD:7F0F:A00:58D:F513:E257:D60F (talk) 10:39, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "Replicant" and "BSD"