Machine message
A sensor publishes a raw value over MQTT.
Standard brokers move MQTT messages. TrailMQ adds policy control, identity context and audit-linked evidence.
Control topic access, explain broker decisions and keep structured evidence for later review. Planned plugins extend this with domain context and historical baseline comparison — without changing your machines or MQTT clients.
Months later, teams need to explain who changed what, which policy was active, what a machine message meant, and why something was allowed, blocked, deferred or calculated. A standard broker only tells you the message moved. TrailMQ keeps that evidence structured and reviewable from the moment it happens.
A sensor publishes a raw value over MQTT.
Client, role and policy context captured with the event.
Publish or subscribe request checked against the active rule set.
Planned plugins can add domain context and baseline comparison.
Everything linked into one reviewable, tamper-evident record.
You keep MQTT. TrailMQ adds a control and evidence layer around broker decisions — no change to your machines or MQTT clients. Why MQTT alone is not GxP compliant
TrailMQ focuses first on access control, identity, decision traces and audit evidence. The planned plugin layer adds domain context and historical comparison where those controls need richer process meaning.
Define who can publish or subscribe to which topics, under which conditions. Policies are versioned and always part of the audit record — so you can prove not just what happened, but which rule allowed or blocked it.
Broker decisions are written as structured evidence with sequencing and integrity controls so they remain readable during later review.
Connect clients, users, services and configuration changes to the evidence record so later reviews can see who acted under which authority.
Not raw logs. Not binary blobs. Structured records a validation engineer, auditor, QA team or OT owner can review without a developer in the room.
Manage topics, users, policies, clients and audit evidence through a self-hosted React UI or the full REST API at /api/v1 — no custom tooling required.
See which MQTT clients are connected and what topics they access. Inspect queue state and dead-letter entries through the REST API without broker-level access.
Turn technical MQTT topics into machine, batch and metric context so QA, OT and engineering teams can review messages in process terms.
Compare live MQTT values against REST-fed historical baselines and record deviations as audit-linked evidence when the comparison context is available.
The layer between your MQTT traffic and the reviewable evidence an audit, a deviation or a regulator will eventually ask for.
Know who changed a setpoint, when it happened, whether the right policy was active and what the message meant in machine, batch or metric context — without touching your PLCs or sensors.
You operate under GMP, and auditors ask questions months later. Get structured evidence for message decisions and technical controls, with planned deviation support where baseline context is available.
You build the infrastructure others rely on. TrailMQ runs as a Docker-based evaluation stack, integrates with existing MQTT clients, and produces evidence downstream systems can consume.
A standard broker tells you messages moved. Here is what it leaves unanswered.
TrailMQ does not compete with your broker. It makes broker decisions and their surrounding evidence visible, reviewable and explainable.
TrailMQ serves as a technical control in support of compliance processes. It does not replace regulatory assessment or validation, but it makes the technical decisions behind MQTT traffic easier to inspect and retain.
TrailMQ is early-stage software and a technical control, not a compliance guarantee or certification claim. Validation, risk assessment and procedural controls remain the responsibility of the regulated organization.
MQTT QoS, durable sessions and retained messages help with transport behavior. GMP-relevant reliability also requires evidence that the right client acted, the right policy was active, failures were handled explicitly and the record can be reviewed later.
Choose QoS, retained state and session behavior deliberately, then document where message loss, duplication, replay and reconnect behavior can affect process decisions.
Bind publish and subscribe decisions to client identity, role, topic policy and configuration version so allowed and blocked actions are explainable.
Store sequence, timing, decision reason, policy state and change context as structured evidence instead of relying on broker logs alone.
For a deeper checklist, read how to ensure reliable MQTT messaging in GMP-regulated manufacturing
The planned plugin layer shows how a live MQTT value could be enriched with domain context, compared with a historical baseline and linked to audit evidence.
An external system provides a baseline for line1 / filler / temperature.
// expected reference for this context
{
"context_key": { "line": "line1", "machine": "filler", "metric": "temperature" },
"baseline": { "value": 22.5, "unit": "C", "source": "historical_average_30d" },
"limits": { "warning_percent": 10, "critical_percent": 20 }
}
A machine publishes 28.4 °C to production/line1/filler/batch/4711/temperature.
TrailMQ links the live value, context, baseline, deviation and decision trace into one reviewable path.
{
"metric": "temperature",
"live_value": 28.4,
"historical_value": 22.5,
"deviation_percent": 26.22,
"severity": "critical",
"context": { "line": "line1", "machine": "filler", "batch_id": "4711" }
}
If required historical context is missing, TrailMQ does not silently skip the calculation. Missing context becomes explicit: deferred, retryable and reviewable.
In GMP and quality-critical environments, the question is not only whether an AI model is powerful — it's whether the data, context and decisions around that model can be trusted and reviewed.
Before a model can reason about industrial data, the value needs domain context: machine, line, batch, metric, policy state and process relevance.
Use deterministic context, baseline and deviation logic before model interpretation, then link the result to reviewable evidence.
If AI later suggests or explains an event, TrailMQ provides the surrounding evidence: what data was used, which context applied, which baseline resolved and which decision path was recorded.
TrailMQ is not positioned as an AI model or analytics platform. It is the controlled MQTT evidence layer that trusted Industrial AI can build on.
Clone the deployment repo, run the guided launcher and choose your first Starter Kit. TrailMQ prepares an evaluation stack for you.
The guided launcher prepares runtime folders, creates local demo certificates when needed, generates evaluation credentials and starts the selected recipe.
After launch, use the Web UI or the REST API to inspect topics, resolve policies, review queues and validate audit evidence.
No migration. No downtime. No code changes on your MQTT clients.
TrailMQ is early-stage software. The GitHub deployment is for evaluation, testing and proof-of-concept work. Production use in regulated or commercial environments requires a valid license.
# Clone the TrailMQ deployment repo
git clone https://github.com/RainerGewalt/TrailMQ.git
cd TrailMQ
# Start the guided launcher
./trailmq launch
# Choose your Starter Kit
[1] Secure MQTT Core
✓ Runtime folders prepared
✓ Config ready
✓ Evaluation credentials generated
✓ Active recipe set
✓ Stack is up
Web UI http://localhost/trailmq/
REST API http://localhost/api/v1
MQTT TLS localhost:8883
MQTT WS ws://localhost/mqtt
MQTT can be used in regulated manufacturing, but a broker alone is not enough. The real question is whether message decisions can be controlled, explained and reviewed later.
Standard brokers move MQTT messages.
TrailMQ makes broker decisions explainable and reviewable.