INTEGRITY-178B and seL4 are not related in terms of their source code or origin, though they do both aim at the same target audience (security and/or safety-critical systems).
I don't have a good knowledge of INTEGRITY-178B, but as far as I can tell some differences are:
* INTEGRITY-178B is a static separation kernel. seL4 can be used as a static separation kernel, but also allows for dynamic systems, for instance with processes being created and torn-down dynamically at run-time;
* INTEGRITY-178B has a proof that a model of the code satisfies particular security properties, while seL4 has a proof that the actual C implementation satisfies particular properties;
* INTEGREITY-178B is certified to EAL6+, while seL4 has not undergone any external certification process. (Without having a good knowledge of EAL6+, my suspicion would be that the code-level aspects of seL4 would meet or exceed EAL6+ certification, while the process-level aspects would need work on the seL4 side.)
If someone has worked with INTEGRITY-178B, please correct me if I have made any mistakes.
Thank you for responding that is a good description.
I remember someone from one of the government agencies gave a talk at in college many years ago about INTEGRITY-178B and about this separation kernel idea.
That was maybe 7-10 ago. The idea was pretty neat. And the claim was that the future will belong to more secure OSes based on this separation kernel (microkernel?). And how say every little component -- memory, filesystem, mouse, display are all in userspace. He talked about ok general purpose computer at that time were too slow to operate in that way (so Linux was better and winning because of performance). But just wait some 10 years or so and machines will be so fast that it won't matter.
So since then that story kind of stuck with me that kind of prompted the question.
