A structured method for aviation security risk decisions.
AeroVigil helps aviation teams move from scattered information to consistent, explainable and traceable security risk assessments. The platform supports human decision-makers with structured intelligence, confidence indicators, mitigation logic and audit-ready records.
STACK
Decision pipeline
The platform is built around five decision principles.
Relevance before volume
More data does not automatically create better decisions. AeroVigil prioritizes signals by operational relevance to airport, route, region and fleet exposure.
Confidence is visible
Each signal should retain source, timestamp, confidence and review status so decision-makers can understand how much weight to give it.
Risk is contextual
The same event can mean different things depending on route, altitude, destination, aircraft, operation type and timing.
Mitigation must be explicit
A risk assessment is incomplete unless mitigation actions are documented and linked to the decision.
Decisions must be traceable
Every assessment should show what was known, what was reviewed, who approved and what changed over time.
From risk factors to operational decision.
Input Signals
Risk Factors
Exposure Review
Mitigation Actions
Approval
Decision Record
Four risk factor groups.
- Closure or restriction
- GPS interference
- Conflict-zone proximity
- Access control concerns
- Civil unrest nearby
- Local security incident
- Military activity
- Political instability
- Threat escalation
- Airport closure
- ATC disruption
- Ground handling / security limitation
Severity and confidence are not the same thing.
AeroVigil treats severity and confidence separately. This prevents weak signals from being over-weighted and confirmed alerts from being buried inside generic noise.
High severity · Low confidence
Review
High severity · High confidence
Immediate Assessment
Low severity · Low confidence
Monitor
Low severity · High confidence
Escalate
Severity →
AI assists the workflow. Humans own the decision.
AeroVigil can assist with classifying signals, summarizing updates and highlighting operational relevance. Security assessment, mitigation selection and operational approval remain controlled by authorized users.
AI-assisted triage
Classification, summarization and clustering accelerate analyst workload — never operational decisions.
Analyst review
A named analyst validates relevance, source confidence and operational framing before publication.
Authorized approval
Risk assessments, mitigation choices and approvals remain with named aviation security users.
If the decision is challenged, the record must survive.
AeroVigil keeps decision evidence connected: sources reviewed, confidence levels, assigned risk factors, mitigation actions, approval chain and timestamps.
AUDIT RECORD
Assessment dossier
sha256 · 7c91 8ad2 22be 4f04
Make security risk decisions easier to explain, review and defend.
Methodology — FAQ
How does AeroVigil classify aviation signals?
AeroVigil classifies each signal by relevance before volume: it tags developments by region, route, FIR, airport, fleet and severity, then maps them to aviation-specific risk categories such as conflict-zone exposure, airspace closures, GPS interference, airport security risk and operational disruption. The goal is consistent, explainable categorization rather than an undifferentiated stream.
What is the safety-versus-security disposition axis?
Every signal is placed on an explicit disposition axis that separates security-relevant risk (deliberate threats — conflict, civil unrest, interference) from safety-relevant risk (operational and technical hazards). This third, orthogonal dimension lets teams understand what kind of risk a signal represents, not just how severe it is.
What is AeroVigil's OSINT alarm policy?
A single open-source signal never raises an alert on its own. OSINT is treated as a lower-confidence input that requires corroboration — by an official source, a sensor signal or additional reporting — before it can drive an alert. This prevents single unverified reports from triggering operational decisions.
How does AeroVigil handle source confidence?
Each signal carries a confidence tier and a source weight reflecting how authoritative it is — official NOTAMs and advisories rank above sensor signals, which rank above open-source reporting. Assessments respect that hierarchy, and confidence is shown explicitly so decision-makers can weigh it.
Is AeroVigil's intelligence reviewed by analysts?
Yes. Raw automated output never reaches the duty desk. A named analyst validates relevance, source confidence and operational framing before an alert is published, providing an accountable human checkpoint in the pipeline.
How are risk decisions made traceable?
AeroVigil records sources, source weights, timestamps, mitigation choices, approval steps and decision rationale for each assessment. Risk assessments and approvals remain with named, authorized aviation security users, producing an audit-ready trail of who decided what, when and why.