Simon Arthur, Managing Director, Insafe explores why locks and safes should be treated as critical infrastructure assets rather than standalone hardware.
Infrastructure resilience is often discussed in terms of digital systems, power continuity and perimeter protection, yet the physical act of securing assets, information and critical spaces remains fundamental.
Across transport hubs, utilities, public buildings, healthcare estates and commercial facilities, locks and safes form part of the underlying framework that supports continuity, safety and accountability.
When these elements function as intended, they operate almost invisibly to maximise operational efficiency. When they do not, the consequences can ripple through day-to-day operations, regulatory compliance and public confidence.
Locks and safes should therefore be considered integral components within a wider risk management and resilience strategy.
Their effectiveness depends not only on product performance, but on alignment with operational demands, governance structures and human behaviour.
As infrastructure estates grow in scale and complexity and as operational pressures increase, physical security decisions demand the same level of scrutiny and expertise as other critical building systems, from design through to maintenance.
Infrastructure environments are characterised by their scale and diversity.
A single organisation may manage hundreds or thousands of access points across sites with vastly different risk profiles and operational priorities.
Poorly specified or managed locking systems can lead to delays, inefficient workflows or unsafe workarounds, undermining safety and security.
Increasingly, operators view locks as part of access governance rather than isolated hardware.
Legacy systems remain a persistent challenge, with many sites still relying on locks installed decades ago, predating current threat models and compliance expectations.
While these systems may function mechanically, they often present challenges in key control, documentation, traceability and adaptability.
Lost or unaccounted-for keys, undocumented modifications and limited repair or replacement options can introduce vulnerabilities that may only become apparent during audits or emergency situations.
Proactively reviewing and upgrading legacy systems on a scaled basis, aligned with available resources, time and budgets, helps ensure physical security remains consistent with current operational practices and evolving threat landscapes.
Human factors are central to effective locking systems. In environments with shift work, contractor access and staff turnover, clear procedures and consistent communication are essential.
Overly complex systems may encourage informal practices that bypass controls.
Many physical security weaknesses arise not from product failure, but from misalignment between system design and everyday operations.
Embedding user training, clear responsibilities and practical guidance helps maintain effective control over access points across diverse and distributed estates.
Integration with wider security measures enhances performance.
Locks can operate alongside surveillance, alarm systems and access management software, creating a layered approach that balances security with operational efficiency.
Regulation and standards continue to shape how locks and safes are specified and managed.
Health and safety, data protection, fire safety and sector-specific legislation all influence physical security decisions.
Compliance represents a baseline rather than an endpoint.
Understanding the rationale behind standards and how they interact with real-world operational pressures, enables organisations to implement more resilient and practical security strategies.
For example, the increased use of lithium-ion batteries across tools, devices and workplace technologies has brought fire safety considerations into sharper focus.
In response, Insafe launched a Lithium-Ion Battery Safe range to provide reliable, tested solutions for the safe storage and charging of lithium batteries.
This includes two models – the Lithium-Ion Battery Safe Lite and the Lithium-Ion Battery Safe Pro.
Locks and safes are long-term assets that often span multiple phases of building use, organisational change and evolving risk profiles.
Their durability, maintainability and adaptability directly influence operational resilience over time.
Safes play a critical role in protecting sensitive documents, master keys, access credentials, pharmaceuticals and controlled equipment.
Effective specification requires careful assessment of use cases and operational context.
While resistance ratings and certifications remain important, usability, auditability and reliability under pressure are equally vital.
As mechanical devices, locks and safes are subject to wear, environmental exposure and variations in use.
Incorporating them into regular inspection and maintenance schedules helps ensure reliable performance throughout their service life.
Selecting assets that can be maintained, repaired or reconfigured in situ reduces disruption and supports sustainable asset management.
Clear documentation and visibility strengthen governance.
Knowing the location, contents and authorised access for locks and safes supports audit requirements, enables effective incident response and aids operational planning.
In large or distributed estates, maintaining this visibility helps prevent fragmentation and ensures consistent management of physical security across multiple sites.
Within the wider security ecosystem, locks and safes provide certainty at critical points, enabling other systems, processes and personnel to operate effectively and supporting the resilience of infrastructure on which society relies daily.
This article was originally published in the February edition of Security Journal UK. To read your FREE digital edition, click here.
