I it's more likely that Kaspersky lumped OpenBSD and Linux together as Unix-likes (very valid since they are talking about basic OS architecture choices in that section), and chose to say Linux instead of Unix-like because Linux is much more widely known.
It's possible but I'm not saying likely. OpenBSD's handling of UNIX architecture, low-level primitives, security features, and code quality stand out a lot. It's still UNIX-like enough to have UNIX weaknesses but they mitigate quite a bit.
Kaspersky has a big-enough ego that I suspect his main goal is just having one of his company's and country's own to brag about. Especially if it ends up better in track record than something like Linux that's very visible albeit not made for security. That will actually be straight-forward if it's a Layer 2 or 3 operating system given how little they need to get right with one.
