>>> We are having to do research by reading other operating systems.
Si Intel cooperates with business partners like apple/windows and not with open source. Does it mean that Apple and Windows can claim to be more secure because they have access to the information needed to fix Intel's issues ?
They can claim it, but I would trust a Linux or FreeBSD box over MacOS or Windows anytime even if they get some security info before the open source operating systems.
Note that I wrote and included a suggested diff for OpenBSD already, and that
at the time the tentative disclosure deadline was around the end of August. As
a compromise, I allowed them to silently patch the vulnerability.
Regardless of whether it is, you should expect the result of that to be that nobody trusts them with embargoes.
Which is in fact, what has happened.
Google broke an embargo early. https://security.googleblog.com/2018/01/todays-cpu-vulnerabi...
EFail embargo was broken. See https://twitter.com/seecurity/status/995964977461776385 and http://flaked.sockpuppet.org/2018/05/16/a-unified-timeline.h...
I don't think picking on OpenBSD is the right thing here.
a.k.a. truth
Linus has "badmouthed" Intel in much harsher and more explicit terms. Linux is just too big for them to get away with trying to smear and slander so they ignore him and move on.