Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Linux kernel is simply not equipped to run trusted code and untrusted code in the same memory. Just for interest sake, is Linux better or worse than MacOS, iOS and Windows at this?
Linux is a security shit show but it is at least publicly auditable, which is a prerequisite to form reasonably confidence in the security of software, or to rapidly correct mistakes found. OpenBSD by contrast has dual auditing and a stellar security reputation, but development is much slower and compatibility is very low. seL4 as an extreme is a micro-kernel with mathematically provable security by design, but no wo…
If you define security as a "lack of exploitable bugs", then security can never be proven, because it's impossible to prove a negative. Also many formally verified systems have had critical bugs discovered, like the KRACK attacks in WPA. The formal verification wasn't wrong, just incomplete, because modeling complex systems is inherently an intractable problem.
The fact that seL4 doesn't even offer bug bounties should be a huge red flag that this is still very much an academic exercise, and should not be used in places where security actually matters.