I would advise taking any claims from HardenedBSD about HardenerBSD with a huge grain of salt. The main code author behind HBSD has a history of his patches to

I would advise taking any claims from HardenedBSD about HardenerBSD with a huge grain of salt. The main code author behind HBSD has a history of his patches to FreeBSD being rejected due to very poor implementation, coding errors, poor quality and not understanding OS and security features design and reasoning and not accepting their reviews and not listening to his peers. He is however very good at getting himself and HBSD a lot of PR attention for bold security claims, but has a very poor record when it comes to quality code. This list is also not very accurate either: his ASLR patches to FreeBSD were rejected due to quality issues, then they were applied to HBSD. The lack of mark for base sandboxing is another one, where FreeBSD had Capsicum sandbox available for few years now and a lot of base is now Capsicum sandboxed, with more and more coming with every release. I could go on here, but that should give you the picture. Take this advice with grain of salt as well - I'm a FreeBSD developer, so I might be biased.