> But the impression the community gives is very much that you can always rollback and everything is in its own sandbox, which is sort of true, but not at all true as soon as malware happens.

I can see why if you do malware research or something like that, you might hear about the rollbacks capability and get your hopes up in a certain way, but that's not really the use case.

NixOS is nice for running untrusted/suspect software in a few ways I can think of, though. (They don't exactly make NixOS a security tool, but I think maybe you could leverage them to build one.)

1. If a NixOS system is compromised, blowing it away and installing from clean media is cheap compared to on other operating systems, since you can retain more of your special configuration. Reinstalling is a bit more like a snapshot restore, at least in terms of the systemwide setup (users, running services and their configurations, and installed packages).

2. NixOS does make it really easy to spin up a clone of your running configuration in a VM instead of directly switching to that config on the local system.

3. The Nix sandbox is a pretty nice place to perform builds from big repos where packages can run arbitrary hooks at build time, like PyPI and NPM, since you can have it build in chroots with temporary build users, no network access, and maybe some other nice things.

There is also actually at least one Nix-based OS trying to achieve new things in security research out there, Spectrum: https://spectrum-os.org/

> I'm surprised at the amount of effort people are expending for just this feature with no additional security.

NixOS (and Nix more generally) doesn't have a singular feature like that driving its usage or development forward, even though rollbacks is a really nice one that will often come to mind when you ask NixOS users what they like about running NixOS.

But if I had to name contenders for the top one or two 'biggest differentiators' from other tools/paradigms that let you achieve similar effects, like other configuration management systems or copy-on-write filesystem snapshotting, I'd say it's the totalizing way that NixOS integrates those features.

Because NixOS generates the configuration of the whole system, it gets to avoid having to inspect most of the system's state, and generally handles the bits of transitioning between configurations that do require inspecting and reasoning about the state of the system quickly and pretty well. There's just a smaller surface area there.

Similarly, you're just more likely to be able to easily roll back with NixOS because those features are built into all of the normal system/package management operations, and leveraging those things is generally the path of least resistance to changing the system. You end up being able to count on them more 'by default'— you're much less likely to make an important change and have a gap without a snapshot. The garbage collection system makes clearing the unused ones data easier (imo). The general reproducibility also gives you multiple sort of layers of intervention for rolling back— even if you do collect all your past generations, your version control system becomes another reliable way of 'rolling back'. Both of those ways of going back and forth through iterations of your configuration can be further combined with similar interventions at other layers, like dotfile management via Home Manager, snapshotting filesystems for unmanaged files, selective persistence via something like Impermanence, etc. These things can add up a system where the kind of ad-hoc changes that might leak through your state management tools (snapper, etckeeper, dotfile management, etc.) become a radical departure from the way you regularly work.

Another differentiator here is maybe the generality: when you Nixify, you sometimes have to do a lot of work up front just to get things working on any deployment target, but the marginal work to go from a NixOS setup to some other kind— generating identical container images, preparing a VM for local use, running your config on macOS, partially sharing your desktop configuration with a server, letting a friend or colleague experiment with or debug your exact setup, preparing an AMI, etc.— is lower, and decreases with each further investment you make in the Nix universe. Different aspects of that inevitably end up being valuable, impressive, or delightful to different users. Taken alone, none of them might seem incomparably compelling over alternative approaches.