So essentially, based on the above, the security of Plan 9 depends on the identification of a host? Meaning that if one trusted host is compromised in the network, then you can just mount anyone's devices or filesystems?
No, there are authentication pieces in place that I did not go into in this article.
Compared to Linux or OpenBSD, is Plan9 as "secure", i.e. randomization of tcp seq numbers, cryptography, authentication, mitigation of spectre and hardware vulnerabilities etc. Or it needs some improvements? Meaning, if I had a simple C application that could easily be ported to plan9 but it has to be super secure, would 9front be advisable, or it's better to stick with Linux or OpenBSD for the time being?
“Those were simpler, more trusting times” is likely the answer you’re looking for.
understood, thanks!
Plan 9 is mostly useful for research interest, not as production infrastructure.