AeroGuard evaluation: validating commands and telemetry

This illustrative customer demonstration uses approved test hardware, synthetic commands and recorded telemetry. It sets out an AeroGuard evaluation, with observations to collect during the session. It makes no claim about a completed customer deployment or an operational flight result.

Define the control path to examine

An infrastructure inspection organisation wants to review the security of the connection between its mission software, flight controller and telemetry services. The technical team needs to identify which endpoints can send commands, what information leaves the local environment and how those interactions are recorded.

AeroGuard provides a software and hardware framework for command validation, protected telemetry and operational policy enforcement. Customer demonstrations are available now. AIC and the customer agree the aircraft and controller interfaces, software versions and network arrangement before selecting the test configuration.

Use a bench or simulation setup with an explicit boundary. Record the components, their permitted interactions and the synthetic data used. This gives the customer a repeatable basis for evaluating the controls without relying on an unfamiliar live operating environment.

Inspect accepted and rejected commands

Begin with an authorised test request and follow its path from the mission application to the control interface. Inspect the validation result and the retained record. The team should be able to identify the sending endpoint, the applicable policy and the outcome.

Then exercise selected unauthorised and replayed test requests. Ask the demonstration to show rejection against the agreed policy and inspect what the operator sees. Record any unsupported case or further integration needed. This is a controlled assessment of the configured command boundary, using requests agreed in advance.

Include a signed test policy representing a flight-plan or geofence requirement. Review how its version and integrity are checked. Change the test policy through the approved process and confirm that the records distinguish interactions under the earlier and later versions.

Follow telemetry through its destinations

Use synthetic telemetry to inspect the configured route between the test components. Identify any local service, relay or hosted endpoint involved. Check which information each endpoint receives and the protection applied to that connection.

AeroGuard’s controls include AES-256 and TLS-secured telemetry. The evaluation should examine their configuration alongside key handling, endpoint identity and hardware integration. Keep those observations with the exact setup tested, including any external dependencies and permitted data routes.

Inspect the runtime integrity checks and command audit records as part of the same session. Ask a reviewer to follow one selected interaction across the components and explain its timestamp, endpoint, policy and result. The review should also identify information still needed to investigate an incomplete or rejected interaction.

Agree the evidence and remaining work

The closing record should contain the tested interfaces, commands, telemetry paths, policy versions and observed outcomes. It should identify compatibility limits, unresolved findings and the assurance work required for the intended deployment. Aircraft safety, communications availability and security controls each retain their own acceptance requirements.

Compare the proposed licence, hardware, integration, testing and support with the cost of commissioning equivalent controls for the same system. An itemised scope makes that commercial comparison useful and exposes work that still sits with the customer.

Read the AeroGuard command and telemetry security article or arrange a demonstration with AIC. Bring the controller details, mission-control stack and telemetry routes that the evaluation needs to examine.

View the AeroGuard product page for capabilities, integration scope and the demonstration enquiry route.