MX in the news: Testing Simulation. Stolen! Engineering IP Theft.

Testing and Simulation Review put a sharp spotlight on a quiet crisis: engineering IP theft through ordinary data exchange. In their feature, Simon Ordish of Majenta’s MX and Charlie Brown of Anzen Technologies unpack why aerospace and automotive programmes are being siphoned, not only by sophisticated attackers, but by ordinary process gaps and hurried habits. When sensitive models and calibrations move across sprawling supplier networks, the margin for error grows wider than anyone likes to admit.

Both experts agree on the core problem. Valuable data is leaving secured studios and labs, then travelling across vendors and regions, often without named accountability or complete records. Some of that data is encrypted, although once it is outside your boundary, it is no longer under your full control. Add the prospect of future decryption and you can see why the industry needs new guardrails, not just stronger locks.

What is being stolen, and why it is surprisingly easy

The target list is obvious to anyone who has worked a programme:

• Design artefacts: CAD assemblies, CAE outputs, wind tunnel results, battery and ECU maps.
• Manufacturing evidence: Tooling parameters, PPAP submissions, defect imagery, supplier concessions.
• Commercial files: RFQs, pricing models, contract drafts and test reports.

Now layer in the supply chain. The average company shares files with 800 plus online domains in the course of business Varonis. In that sprawl, people fall back on email, public links, and local workarounds. External research shows that 9.2 percent of documents shared externally contain sensitive information Computerworld. It is no surprise that leaks often start as mundane misdelivery, not drama.

The quantum window and why encryption alone is not enough

Ordinary encryption remains essential. Yet long lead engineering is now inside the quantum windowDesigns created today may reach peak commercial value in future years, when quantum capable attackers could decrypt archived data.. Adoption of quantum resistant controls in the wild is still tiny, for example roughly 0.029 percent in some OpenSSH contexts arXiv. That gap matters for any design with a long shelf life.

MX’s response is architectural. The anonymise, shard, restore approach breaks content into shards stripped of identifying metadata, routes them separately, then reassembles at the authorised destination. Paired with named user access and complete audit trails, it adds friction for thieves while keeping projects moving. MX describes this as a quantum secure patented methodology that can facilitate compliance programmes and future readiness without making daily work unbearable.

Five moves that shrink your attack surface this quarter

Practical, programme friendly, and proven across supply chains.

If you are exploring next steps, compare MX’s features, read the perspective on quantum ready protection, and see how to keep speed without risk in Balancing speed and security. For the broader conversation, visit MX in the News: Engineering IP Theft and our take on the harvest now, decrypt later problem.