As a manufacturer in the access control space, we face a unique challenge when we design new hardware, such as locks or readers. We're not just building a product for today's needs—we're building for a timeline that could easily span three decades.
In most technology sectors, a five to seven year product lifecycle is considered reasonable. Smartphones, computers, even enterprise software follow relatively predictable replacement cycles. But security hardware operates in a different universe entirely.
Walk into any commercial building today, and you'll likely find access control hardware that's been installed for 20, 30, or even 40 years. The same readers, panels, and locks that were state-of-the-art in the 1990s are still controlling access to millions of doors across the country. This isn't because building owners are particularly attached to legacy technology—it's because replacing physical security infrastructure is expensive, disruptive, and complex.
This creates a fundamental paradox: we must design products using only components we know and have available today, while anticipating use cases and security requirements that don't even exist yet. It's like being asked to build a bridge for cars that haven't been invented, using materials that will only be available for the first third of the bridge's lifespan. We know—with absolute certainty—that the lock we're designing today could still be functioning in 2045 or beyond.
The challenge isn't just about hardware longevity—it's about the ecosystem these systems exist within. Modern access control solutions require:
Even if we develop a technologically superior product, the calculus for a building owner isn't simply "is this better?" It's "is this better enough to justify the cost, complexity, and disruption of replacing everything currently installed?"
This is why older technologies like proximity cards have persisted far longer than their security profile would suggest they should. It's not that facility managers don't understand the vulnerabilities—it's that the path to upgrading presents enormous practical barriers.
Universal standards provide some assistance with this challenge. When we can design to established specifications from organizations like the LEAF Community, we gain valuable guidance about future requirements. Standards bodies think ahead about technology evolution, giving us benchmarks for security capabilities, storage requirements, and processing power.
This allows us to make more informed decisions about component selection and system architecture. We can build products that are more future-proof because we're designing to specifications that anticipate coming changes in credential technology.
However, standards can't solve everything. There will always be protocols and security requirements that don't exist when we're finalizing a design. The best we can do is build in as much flexibility as possible—selecting more capable components than today's requirements strictly demand, including connectivity options that might only be relevant years from now, and designing software architectures that can evolve even when the underlying hardware cannot.
From a facility manager's perspective, this creates real tension. They're being asked to invest in new technology with the promise of better security and more features, but they're also being asked to accept that even this new system will eventually face the same obsolescence challenges.
The decision to upgrade becomes a risk calculation: How long will this new system remain current? What assurances do I have about future compatibility? Can this system be updated remotely, or will we face another complete hardware replacement in 10 years?
These are fair questions that deserve honest answers. As manufacturers, we can't promise that hardware will last forever while remaining compatible with future requirements. What we can promise is thoughtful design that maximizes longevity and compatibility, participation in standards that ensure interoperability, and commitment to supporting our products for as long as physically possible.
The 30-year problem won't disappear, but the industry is making progress. Universal locks and readers that support multiple credential technologies offer migration paths without complete system replacement. Standards-based credentials ensure that today's investment won't become tomorrow's proprietary trap. And increasingly capable hardware platforms can adapt to new requirements through firmware updates.
The key is setting realistic expectations. Access control hardware will continue to have long service lives, and that's actually a feature, not a bug—these are physical security systems that need to be dependable and durable. But we can work together as an industry to ensure that longevity doesn't come at the cost of security or flexibility.
For hardware manufacturers, that means designing with standards compliance from the start, building in more capability than today's requirements demand, and staying engaged with industry conversations about where technology is heading. For building owners and facility managers, it means asking the right questions during procurement and choosing partners who demonstrate commitment to interoperability and long-term support.
The buildings we secure today will still be standing in 2055. Our challenge as an industry is ensuring that the access control systems protecting them can evolve to meet threats we can't yet imagine, using technology that hasn't been invented yet. It's a humbling responsibility, but one that drives us to think more carefully about every design decision we make.
Read the complete series:
.png){kind=small}
.png)
.png)
