FreeBSD needs neither apparmor nor selinux, it has its own access control system called MAC (Mandatory Access Control) which is modular, flexible and more integrated with the operating system without the need for complex configurations like selinux.
Discussion
Thinking about operating system security, especially the reputation BSDs (and OpenBSD notably) have. I get the philosophy, but I'm curious how much difference it makes in practice for day-to-day stuff compared to Linux.
Do you find BSDs inherently hold up better security-wise in typical use, or does it mostly come down to how you set things up and keep them updated on either platform?
It is not a question that can be answered with a yes or no answer.
Within Linux you have more secure and less secure distributions, for example the default security of an Arch Linux is crap because it has neither apparmor nor selinux and putting it is a pain in the ass, nor secure boot.
Nor does OpenBSD offer the same security as FreeBSD, OpenBSD being considered the most secure operating system in the world.
I could summarize it this way from more security to less security.
OpenBSD > FreeBSD > Debian > Fedora > Arch Linux
As handicap of the BSD is that they do not support secureboot, although FreeBSD is in process.
Thank you for those precisions 👍🏼