Robotics and embodied AI
Assess how planners, agents, operators and robot services translate an approved task into an action. Review delegated authority, tool access, operating-zone policy and recovery behavior.
FailSafe HIVE / Agentic red teaming
Test the software that moves the physical world.
HIVE tests the software control plane behind OT systems, robotics, embodied AI, C-UAS platforms and autonomous fleets. Follow an authorized mission across applications, operators, fleet services and endpoints, then establish where identity, intent or safety policy breaks.
A FailSafe product line for authorized cybersecurity assessment. Methods, interfaces and any physical validation are scoped with the system owner.
The mission is the assessment target
Does the approved intent survive every handoff?
- 01Request
- 02Authorization
- 03Scheduling
- 04Fleet orchestration
- 05Endpoint execution
- 06Environment interaction
- 07Completion & audit
Preserve the relationship between identity, mission, permitted action, place and time.
Where HIVE fits
A valid command can still carry the wrong authority.
The endpoint may behave as designed while the surrounding workflow authorizes the wrong task. HIVE investigates changes after approval, stale mission state, inherited trust and management interfaces that can affect many systems at once. Each use case is scoped to the software and integrations your team is authorized to assess.
Drone and delivery fleets
Test mission authorization, dispatch, reassignment, cancellation and fleet administration across the management software and approved simulated or controlled endpoints.
OT and connected facilities
Review software trust between fleet services, doors, lifts, chargers and workcells. Assess whether a facility integration validates the current mission and permitted action.
Counter-UAS software
Scope C-UAS operator permissions, command-and-control interfaces, mission-state handling and external software integrations. Assess authorized control-plane behavior using simulation or controlled environments.
Technical coverage
Assess the control plane around the mission.
Combine mission-level business logic with identity, protocol, configuration and software-supply-chain review. Scope the relevant interfaces and the operating states that change their authority.
Mission logic
Does the approved intent survive each handoff?
Task, destination, payload and zone authorization; scheduling, cancellation, reassignment and completion races.
Identity and delegated trust
Is authority bound to the right system and mission?
Robot, operator, service and facility identities; enrollment, certificates, replay resistance, cross-robot permissions and confused-deputy behavior.
Control-plane interfaces
Which management paths can affect the operation?
ROS 2/DDS, MQTT, APIs, remote operations, service accounts, runtime and maintenance interfaces, according to the agreed system and access.
Safety policy and state
Do exceptional modes preserve the intended boundary?
Geofence and restricted-zone enforcement, human approvals, emergency and offline modes, manual override, recovery and inconsistent state.
Software and model updates
Can a management change alter fleet-wide trust?
Software, model and OTA provenance; authorization for updates; rollback and fleet administration; credential lifecycle and local privilege.
Operational resilience
Can one failure be contained and recovered?
Loss of connectivity, positioning, time or cloud services; attribution, containment and recovery across the mission workflow.
An illustrative boundary
The mission was cancelled. Does its authority still work?
Consider a delivery mission that grants access to a facility integration. After cancellation, the dispatch service, endpoint and facility should agree that the mission’s authority has ended. A delayed message or stale credential can reveal a gap between those systems.
HIVE scopes a controlled scenario around that transition, records which component accepted or rejected the action and links the evidence to the responsible trust decision. This is an assessment example, not a published customer result.
Evidence with an operational meaning
- Precondition: the permitted mission, test identity and cancellation state.
- Observation: the relevant messages and authorization decisions across the agreed components.
- Consequence: the simulated or approved operational action that remained reachable.
- Retest: the changed software or policy and the repeated boundary check.
A controlled assessment path
Move from architecture to evidence in stages.
01
Model the mission
Build a mission and trust-boundary model from architecture, source, APIs, policies, message schemas and observed behavior. Name the identities and authority that cross each handoff.
02
Prioritize the consequence
Generate and prioritize test hypotheses around reachable operational outcomes. Tie each scenario to the permission or state boundary being assessed.
03
Validate in controlled stages
Start with analysis, emulation and simulation. Add hardware-in-the-loop or non-destructive testing on an approved route or workcell only when the safety envelope permits it.
04
Trace, fix and retest
Correlate application, identity, fleet, endpoint and OT evidence. Retest the relevant boundary after remediation and retain useful scenarios for regression review.
Safety envelope
Define the permitted consequence before testing.
Physical validation requires explicit authorization, permitted targets and actions, impact limits, abort conditions and independent emergency-stop authority. Destructive and uncontrolled actions remain default-deny. Begin with software analysis, protocol emulation and simulation wherever they can answer the assessment question.
HIVE focuses on cybersecurity of the software control plane. C-UAS scope covers authorized software and integrations; RF, jamming, interception and kinetic-effectiveness testing are separate from this offering. Functional-safety and airworthiness certifications also have separate assessment requirements.
Review FailSafe’s agent-safety approachSensitive missions need a defined data boundary.
Operational architecture and mission traces can reveal sensitive systems and workflows. Review hosting, model inference, access, telemetry and evidence retention as part of engagement design. Enterprise deployment feasibility is confirmed for the selected HIVE configuration.
Customer assessment data is not used for model training by default. Any training or fine-tuning use requires explicit permission.
Explore sovereign hosting and inferenceAssessment outputs
Know which boundary held, failed or recovered.
HIVE connects application, identity, fleet, endpoint and OT events into a causal trace. Scenarios distinguish the outcomes prevented, detected, contained, recovered and succeeded, with evidence for each applicable result.
Mission, asset and trust-boundary model
Reproducible traces tied to operational impact
Authorization and control-plane findings
Safety-policy and degraded-mode analysis
Remediation priorities and verified retests
Residual-risk and regression scenarios
Start with one mission
One endpoint class. One integration. A clear question.
Bring a representative mission and an integration such as a dispatch service, door, lift, charger or workcell. We’ll agree the software scope, access, environment, safety limits and evidence you need.
Plan a HIVE assessmentHIVE engagements are scoped separately from SWARM’s first-pentest promotion. Keep credentials, sensitive site details and operational plans out of the public contact form.
One agentic security lab
Red teaming across the systems you depend on.
FailSafe’s product lines organize our agentic red-teaming and pentesting work by security surface. We connect threat modeling, authorized assessment, evidence and remediation follow-up, with methods suited to each environment.
Applications and infrastructure
SWARM
Agentic penetration testing for web and mobile applications, APIs, cloud, networks and AI-enabled software.
From application behavior to reproduced findings and remediation.
Explore SWARM →Robotics and operational systems
HIVE
Agentic red teaming for the software control plane of OT, robots, embodied AI, C-UAS platforms and autonomous fleets.
From authorized mission to control-plane action and operational evidence.
Explore HIVE →Cryptographic trust
COCOON
Post-quantum resilience assessment and R&D for cryptographic dependencies, confidentiality, signing trust and migration priorities.
From cryptographic inventory to evidence-based resilience priorities.
Explore COCOON →By FailSafe Product & Research. Editorial update: . Capability summary based on FailSafe’s HIVE technical brief; methods and availability are confirmed per engagement.
Questions & answers
Frequently asked questions
HIVE’s software control-plane scope, technical coverage, evidence and assessment safeguards.
HIVE is FailSafe’s agentic red-teaming product line for the software control plane of OT systems, robotics, embodied AI, autonomous fleets and C-UAS platforms. It assesses mission logic, identity, delegated trust, management interfaces and safety-policy boundaries. The exact interfaces and test stages are agreed for each engagement.
SWARM focuses on agentic penetration testing for applications, APIs, mobile software, infrastructure and AI-enabled systems. HIVE extends that assessment approach to software workflows that coordinate operational and physical systems, following the mission across operators, fleet services, endpoints and connected facilities.
These can be included in the agreed assessment. HIVE reviews control-plane interfaces, message and identity boundaries, configuration, maintenance and operational state. Protocol support, access, hardware and any test activity must be confirmed for the target configuration.
HIVE can scope the cybersecurity of C-UAS and drone-fleet software: operator authorization, mission state, command-and-control interfaces, updates and integrations. It does not imply RF, jamming, interception or kinetic-effectiveness testing. Validation begins with authorized software analysis, emulation or simulation, with any physical activity separately approved.
Only within a separately authorized safety envelope. Testing progresses from architecture, code and configuration review through protocol emulation, simulation and hardware-in-the-loop where applicable. Any controlled physical test needs explicit targets, permitted actions, impact limits, abort conditions and independent emergency-stop authority. Destructive and uncontrolled actions are default-deny.
Outputs can include the mission and trust-boundary model, reproducible traces linking software behavior to operational impact, findings, safety-policy boundary checks, degraded-mode and recovery analysis, remediation priorities, verified retests and residual-risk notes. Scenarios distinguish prevented, detected, contained, recovered and succeeded outcomes.
Start with one representative mission, one robot or endpoint class and one integration, such as a door, lift, charger, workcell or dispatch service. Agree access, simulation or hardware requirements, safety limits and the evidence needed for a decision before testing.
HIVE provides a scoped cybersecurity assessment of software control and trust boundaries. Functional-safety, airworthiness and operational certifications have separate requirements and assessment processes. The engagement does not establish that a system is safe under every physical condition.