When the System Makes the Decision: Food Safety in Industry 5.0
A technical interview on why digital controls, cybersecurity and governance must be part of food safety in Industry 5.0.
Neste artigo
William
Valesca, you have long been recognized as a food safety specialist. When we talk about Industry 5.0, automation and cybersecurity, are we talking about a new universe or an evolution of what already existed?
Valesca
It is an evolution of risk.
The fundamentals remain the same: protect the food, ensure process control and prevent deviations.
What changed is where risk can originate.
Before, risk was predominantly physical: temperature failure, cross-contamination, operational error.
Today, risk can also be digital. If the process is controlled by sensors, PLCs and automated systems, any improper change in those systems can directly affect food safety.
Industry 5.0 does not replace HACCP. It expands HACCP.
William
You often say that “industrial cybersecurity is food safety.” Can you explain that statement?
Valesca
Of course.
If a PLC controls the temperature of a cooking or sterilization process, and someone changes the minimum setpoint without formal control, the process may continue to operate, but the sanitary barrier has changed.
If an interlock is placed in bypass without a record, a food product may move forward outside specification.
If data can be edited or deleted, traceability can be compromised.
Do you see the point? The risk is not only technological. It is sanitary.
When technology controls critical process decisions, information security becomes food safety.
William
Do all these instruments require calibration? Setpoints, bypasses, sensors?
Valesca
No. This is a common misunderstanding.
Sensors require calibration because they measure physical quantities such as temperature, pressure or humidity.
But setpoints, interlocks, bypasses and PLC logic are not calibrated. They are governed.
What they require is:
access control
change records
formal change management
validation after modification
Calibration protects measurement.
Governance protects the decision.
In Industry 5.0, protecting automated decisions is fundamental to food safety.
William
What did you start asking in audits after you began deepening this technological perspective?
Valesca
I still ask about CCPs and critical controls, but I add a new layer:
Who can change the setpoint?
Is there a history of changes?
Is there impact analysis before the change?
Is the bypass formally authorized?
Has the backup been tested?
Is there a structured operational continuity plan?
Today, I do not audit only the critical parameter.
I audit the system that protects the critical parameter.
William
Is having a closed network and a firewall enough?
Valesca
It is an excellent start, but it is not an absolute guarantee.
A firewall protects the perimeter.
Maturity protects the system.
True protection involves:
internal privilege control
change records
vulnerability management
recovery plan testing
integration between quality, automation and top management
A plant may be isolated from the internet and still lack structured governance over critical changes.
Isolation does not replace maturity.
William
What is the biggest mistake when discussing Industry 5.0 applied to food safety?
Valesca
Thinking it is an IT topic.
Industry 5.0 is not sophisticated technology.
It is management maturity over technology.
Modern governance means mapping operational, technological, cyber and reputational risks in an integrated way.
It is not an IT agenda.
It is a top management agenda.
Because a digital failure can generate:
nonconforming product
recall
plant shutdown
loss of certification
reputational impact
This is strategic.
William
If you had to summarize food safety in the 5.0 era in one sentence?
Valesca
In Industry 5.0, the hazard is not only the visible deviation.
It is the silent change in the control that was supposed to prevent the deviation.
