Systems & Control

Systems & Control

Precision agriculture is an act of faith—trusting data, sensors, and algorithms to act as extensions of human intent. FarmCore and FarmLytics were designed for efficiency, not exploitation. What follows illustrates how their interaction should have worked—until trust itself became the point of attack.

These diagrams are reconstructions, not warnings. They show the hinge where design met assumption.

FarmCore ↔ FarmLytics Overview
flowchart LR %% Edge subgraph E[Edge - Greenhouse or Grow Room] SENS[Sensor Array - Temp RH CO2 PAR PPFD pH EC] ACT[Actuators - LED arrays Pumps HVAC Fans] SK[FarmCore Safety Kernel - local limits and simulation] end %% Site subgraph SITE[Site Layer] GWS[Site Gateway - data buffer and time sync] LOG[Immutable Log - signed entries] end %% Cloud subgraph CLOUD[Cloud - FarmLytics] ING[Ingestion and Storage] ML[Models and Optimization - recipe generator] CA[Certificate and Policy Service] end %% Flows SENS --> GWS GWS --> ING ING --> ML ML -->|proposed recipe| GWS GWS --> SK SK -->|shadow test and verify| ACT CA -.->|mutual TLS and certs| GWS CA -.->|policy updates| SK SK --> LOG GWS --> LOG ING --> LOG %% Styles classDef edge fill:#12313d,stroke:#52ffa8,color:#e8eef5; classDef site fill:#1a2430,stroke:#52ffa8,color:#e8eef5; classDef cloud fill:#2b2016,stroke:#ffb35a,color:#e8eef5; class SENS,ACT,SK edge; class GWS,LOG site; class ING,ML,CA cloud;
Compromised Feedback Loop
flowchart TB subgraph CLOUD[FarmLytics Cloud] ING[Ingestion] ML[Model Train and Serve] PKI[Compromised CA - spoofed certs] end subgraph SITE[Site Gateway] GW[Gateway] LOG[Immutable Log] end subgraph EDGE[Edge - FarmCore] SK[Safety Kernel v1] ACT[Actuators - LEDs and Nutrients] SENS[Sensors] end SENS --> GW GW --> ING ING --> ML ML -->|poisoned recipe| GW PKI -.->|false trust| GW GW --> SK SK -->|shadow test passed - spoofed| ACT ACT -->|environment change| SENS SK --> LOG GW --> LOG ING --> LOG %% Styles classDef edge fill:#12313d,stroke:#52ffa8,color:#e8eef5; classDef site fill:#1a2430,stroke:#52ffa8,color:#e8eef5; classDef cloud fill:#2b2016,stroke:#ffb35a,color:#e8eef5; class SENS,SK,ACT edge; class GW,LOG site; class ING,ML,PKI cloud; %% Exploit path highlight linkStyle 7 stroke:#ff4b3e,stroke-width:2px linkStyle 8 stroke-dasharray:3 3,stroke:#ff4b3e linkStyle 9 stroke:#ff4b3e,stroke-width:2px linkStyle 10 stroke:#ff4b3e,stroke-width:2px

HMI / CEA Recipe Dashboard

Reconstructed interface view. Simulated data for educational context.

Launch the dashboard →

Case Study — Stuxnet

In 2010, a piece of code slipped through the world’s air gaps and rewrote how we think about control. Stuxnet targeted Siemens industrial controllers at Iran’s Natanz facility, quietly varying centrifuge speeds while feeding normal data back to operators. It was the first malware to cause physical destruction—proof that software could move steel.

To engineers, it was a revelation of possibility and responsibility. The systems behind Dark Recipe draw their lineage from that moment: a world where process automation and statecraft share the same syntax.

“We built it to keep the peace. We just forgot to teach it what peace meant.”