Giving an AI agent its own private key is one of the riskiest security decisions you can make right now. A private key allows software to sign transactions for you, and researchers have already tricked AI agents into signing transfers to wallets the researchers controlled. A key management service (KMS) keeps keys locked away and still allows agents to use them, without ever having full access to the key itself. There's 3 critical reasons your agents need a KMS that is actually secure👇 1. A tricked agent can't leak the key if it never has full access to it 2. Limits live at the key level, so when you set a limit like "never send more than $500" the agent cannot bypass this limit 3. Hardware-isolated environments (like TEEs) let you verify where signing happens instead of trusting a server As agents get more capable, a trusted KMS is how you decide what they're actually allowed to do. We see this as critical infrastructure to the future of the space internet. More to share on this soon 👀

Post Quantum Cryptography (PQC) is critical infrastructure for space technologies. And this is a much deeper conversation than just preparing for the inevitability of quantum computers breaking classic cryptographic encryption. We need to build adaptable, software-enabled post-quantum migration solutions for spacecrafts that work with data in any capacity. At SpaceComputer, PQC readiness and migration is a top priority amongst our cybersecurity solutions. Subscribe & watch the full video on YouTube: youtu.be/oa4zc0JiwH0

Post-quantum migration is fundamentally a key management problem. You can’t upgrade key security if you can’t find the keys. A key management service (KMS) centralizes key generation, storage, access control, rotation, and audit, so keys live in one hardened place, like a trusted execution environment (TEE). That's security you need today. Post quantum cryptography (PQC) is security for the future where quantum computers will eventually break public key encryption. These threats are relevant today. Harvest now, decrypt later attacks collect encrypted data today to break it once quantum machines are strong enough. So why do you need both? When every key lives in a KMS and you swap in quantum-resistant algorithms, every key inherits the upgrade. The KMS becomes your layer of cryptographic agility. A KMS also automates the mechanics of generating new keys, re-encrypting data, and key rotation and retirement across your stack. It also absorbs the friction of PQC's larger keys and signatures so your applications stay fast. With quantum computing still on the horizon, and KMS options available from every cloud provider, why is SpaceComputer building a post-quantum agile platform? One simple reason: a satellite launched today must be ready for the next 5-10 years. You can't add hardware in orbit (for obvious reasons), so crypto-agility must be built in before launch. Our KMS will anchor keys in attested TEEs, non-exportable by design: they can be used but never extracted. We're starting with hardened infrastructure on Earth, eventually moving to keys born in orbit inside a satellite-based TEE, with post-quantum readiness currently in development. So we ask you: how are your security keys managed today? And if you could test a KMS built for orbit: would you? Drop a 🙋 below if you'd want early access.

Post-quantum cryptography changes the math that supports your security without changing how it works on the surface. You'll still have a private key and a public key. The algorithms are migrated within a key management service to withstand quantum computers, not just classical ones. @rezabfil breaks it down in the clip below 👇

There's 15,000 satellites in orbit today, with projections for over 100,000 by 2030. As part of the new generation of companies racing to build compute satellites, we ask one question: how are companies handling their cybersecurity? Many platforms are marketed as 'secure' and 'sovereign' yet take no visible steps towards cybersecurity measures. And cybersecurity is becoming such critical infrastructure in space it's at a 5 billion dollar market gap in 2025. This coincides with cyber incidents surging upwards of 118% in 2025, with little critical infrastructure built to encrypt, secure, and protect everything from ground stations to GEO spacecraft. We're building to fill that gap, and solve the security problem in space infrastructure. Here's a comprehensive breakdown of the state of the industry, and what we need to do next with cybersecurity for space infrastructure: blog.spacecomputer.io/the-5-…

If your satellite isn't secure at launch, it can be compromised with as little as a software-defined radio and a few software bugs. "So we have to consider the life cycle and the lifetime of the designs of the respective choices, the respective spacecrafts and make sure that there are solutions for that." That's our mission at at SpaceComputer: building secure satellite computing systems for the long term, starting at the hardware and software level. Catch the full deep dive with on YouTube: youtu.be/mip1p4zy3Ks

Watch the full episode of the Space Show here: youtube.com/watch?v=Lrim_L9b…

Every spacecraft and ground station in the data chain needs security and end-to-end verifiability. One of the best use cases for this is satellite imaging. Our approach to this is to use cryptographically verify what image came from which satellite. This high-security guarantees help prove the image wasn't tampered with, which is useful for providers and data users alike. Let us know in the comments what other use cases verifiability in orbit could be used for? 🤔

Are space data centers are dumb, or does SpaceX's IPO filing make them inevitable? This is the most polarizing debate in orbital computing: cooling vs. power. We cover both arguments at their strongest points, and the R&D pipeline that will end the argument by 2027. Read it here: blog.spacecomputer.io/orbita…

For some applications, the most secure place to run a computer is where nobody can reach it. For others physical inaccessibility is the biggest limitation. We spend a lot of time thinking about these kinds of tradeoffs that come with building compute systems in orbit. On Earth, compute is abundant and trust is the hard part. Roughly 55% of data center security incidents come from the inside. In orbit - nobody can access the satellite, and therefore the physical attack surface is ≈0. In orbit, that same isolation means no repairs, radiation-constrained chips, and a power budget where one satellite roughly equals one GPU today. So which one do you build on? It depends on what applications you're building for and the level of in-depth security you need. If physical possession of the hardware is part of your threat model, orbit offers guarantees Earth can't match. If you need fast, large-scale compute, and your threat model is handled by conventional controls, Earth wins on practicality. (For now). So where do you sit on the tradeoffs of physical isolation and capabilities on Earth versus on orbit? Let us know in the comments 👇

👀🛰️

At SpaceComputer, we look at our open infrastructure the way the internet once looked at Linux. Linux infrastructure is open, auditable, and vendor-neutral. That openness is why it’s the foundation of the internet: hyperscalers, competitors, and governments could all standardize on it, because trusting Linux never meant trusting a vendor. We're doing the same for the space internet. Our infrastructure design, Space Fabric, is built on open verification. We publish our tech stack and system design, and work with hardware partners like Tropic Square also take an open source approach. We incorporate Raspberry Pis into our infrastructure due to their exceptional interoperability across diverse applications. Linux was one of the biggest companies to build backbone level verifiable infrastructure into what it is today. The space internet needs the same foundation, and we're building it. Explore the solutions we offer now: spacecomputer.io/solutions/?…

In public reporting alone, there's been a 118% surge in space-related cyber incidents from 2024 to 2025. And the pattern they follow will shock you. Attacks often begin inside of trusted systems on Earth. Without end-to-end security and threat modelling, most companies are flying blind (literally) to attacks on their spacecraft. This begs the question: Which trust decisions across the Earth-to-orbit path can be independently verified, and what risks remain outside of verification? In a critical analysis by @rezabfil and @zkpedrongmi, 10 threat scenarios were identified across Earth to orbit, that can be solved by implementing a verifiable trust layer. Read the full threat model analysis here: blog.spacecomputer.io/end-to…

More epic developments from our amazing dev team: @zkpedrongmi developed Spacebase, visualizing how SpaceComputer infra works in orbit! 🛰️ Check it out: spacebase.spacecomputer.io/ let us know what you think 💭👇

Today at 2pm PT! Join us and the legend Dr. David Livingston for a deep dive into space infra you don't want to miss! 🔊🛰️ thespaceshow.com/show/16-aug…

The space sector inherited so much of its culture from government bureaus, where information was gatekept. That culture is changing fast, and we're ushering in a new spirit to the space sector. Our choice to build open source infrastructure in orbit is a choice that has left people puzzled. Everything about the space industry incentivizes keeping the tech in a walled garden. 3 reasons companies choose close source: 1. Protect expensive IP 2. National security laws & compliance 3. Control every detail of the system All three concerns come down to the same question: who holds system data, and what happens if that data ends up in the wrong hands. Cryptography changes this calculation by adding verifiability and encryption. For comparative reference: your bank publishes which encryption standards it uses and keeps your keys secret, and the same logic applies in orbit. Satellite-based TEEs and cryptographic attestation lets the customer verify while everything else stays confidential. Being open source is a choice that shapes how we operate: a development process distributed across the world, deliberate decisions about which components we pick for our stack. Head to the full podcast episode on our architecture: youtu.be/mip1p4zy3Ks

This Sunday, August 16th, Co-Founders @semicondurian and @rezabfil are joining @SpaceShow with Dr. David Livingston! We'll be discussing how SpaceComputer is building the secure space internet: satellite-based TEEs, Space Fabric, and why the next generation of spacecraft needs credibly neutral, interoperable infrastructure. The Space Show is live with questions, so show up ready to ask yours! Tune in on Zoom at 2 PM PDT / 5 PM ET: thespaceshow.com/show/16-aug…

As the space internet emerges, so do its applications. Onboard AI processing of Earth observation (EO) data. Satellites connecting directly to your phone. Today, connectivity inside a single constellation is possible, but between different vendors, they don't link. Connectivity across services is a goal at this stage. Reaching it will be critical to offer secure services from orbit the same as we do on Earth. Here's how a secure system would complete a user's request: A query enters through an API for analyzed EO data. A ground station finds an available satellite, books the contact window, and translates the request into a signed task. The EO satellite captures the imagery, then passes the data to a compute satellite. Onboard AI would extract the answer inside a trusted execution environment (TEE), with attestation verifying what code ran. Only the results are downlinked back through the ground station to the user. This connectivity and interoperability is what will make the space internet comparable to Earth internet. As more spacecraft and active satellites head into orbit, we need applications that connect securely end to end across satellites, ground stations, and everything in between. Where do you think in this process will have the biggest challenges with reaching Earth-level capacities? 🛰️