Fail Safe vs Fail Secure: Top Differences in Locking Systems

When I worked in the hospitality industry, the electricity abruptly went out while we were establishing the network and door locks. To my surprise, the door lock opened like any other door. This was the first time in my life that I had ever seen a fail-safe door lock.

I have comprehensively analyzed the area of physical security, particularly the ongoing discussion surrounding fail safe vs fail-safe secure electric strike locking systems. These two distinct approaches offer unique strategies for securing buildings and valuables.

Fail-safe mechanisms prioritize emergency exits, automatically unlocking doors during urgent situations like fires or power outages to ensure safe and swift evacuation. On the other hand, fail-secure systems focus on maintaining continuous security, keeping doors locked even in difficult conditions to protect assets. The choice between these systems significantly impacts a building's safety and security. In this analysis, I will explain the fundamental differences between fail-safe and fail-secure locking systems.

What are Fail-Safe Door Locks?

This refers to my professional experience, and I can indicate that fail-safe door locks are critical components of modern security systems. These locks are designed to automatically unlock during emergencies or power outages, ensuring swift evacuation or access for first responders. Fail safe electric strikes lock when DC current is applied and can be opened manually during power failures. They operate on principles that prioritize safety above all else, employing fail-safe mechanisms such as battery backups or mechanical overrides to guarantee functionality in adverse conditions. In my professional opinion, integrating fail-safe door locks is a non-negotiable aspect of any comprehensive security strategy, providing peace of mind and safeguarding against unforeseen circumstances.

What are Fail Secure Magnetic Door Locks?

I've come across various types of security measures, including failed secure magnetic door locks. These sophisticated locks operate on the principle of maintaining secure access control, even in the event of power failure or system malfunction. First, fail secure electric strikes, fail secure magnetic door locks remain locked, preventing unauthorized entry. This ensures that sensitive areas and assets stay protected, strengthening the overall security posture. It has a robust design and reliable performance. Secure magnetic door locks are a cornerstone of modern physical security systems.

Attend Cyber Security trainings to understand fail-safe and fail-secure locks for enhanced security measures.

Fail Safe vs Fail Secure Comparison Table

According to my experience and knowledge, the comparison table below outlines the main distinctions between fail safe and fail secure locking systems:

Parameter	Fail Safe Locks	Fail Secure Locks
Behavior on Power Loss	Unlocks doors to allow free egress or entry	Locks doors to prevent unauthorized access
Security Priority	Safety-oriented, prioritizes quick evacuation	Security-oriented, prioritizes protection against intrusion
Common Applications	Emergency exits, fire doors	High-security areas, restricted access points
Power Requirements	Typically requires power to remain locked	Can remain locked even without power
Vulnerability to Power Failure	Vulnerable, as doors may inadvertently unlock	Resilient, maintains security even during power outages
Response to System Failure	Unlocks to facilitate escape routes	Maintains locked position to deter unauthorized access
Integration with Access Control Systems	Often integrated with fire alarm systems	Compatible with various access control systems
Maintenance Needs	Minimal maintenance is required for proper function	Regular maintenance is necessary to ensure consistent locking
Regulatory Compliance	Compliant with safety regulations for emergency situations	Meets security standards for controlled access environments
Cost Considerations	Generally cost-effective due to simpler mechanisms	May incur higher costs due to enhanced security features

Consider enrolling in KnowledgeHut’s Certified Ethical Hacker course online, which is relevant for individuals interested in understanding the nuances of fail-safe and fail-secure locks as outlined here.

Difference Between Fail Safe and Fail Secure

I was part of many conversations about fail safe and fail secure mechanisms in physical security systems.Typically, a fail-safe and fail-secure electric strike ensures reliable access control by either releasing or securing a door in response to power loss or system failure. Now, let us examine the many characteristics of each and compare them in depth

1. Fail Safe vs Fail Secure: Mechanism

Fail Safe:

In a fail-safe mechanism, the default state of the locking system is unlocked. It follows that the lock will disengage automatically to permit free admission or exit in the case of a power outage or other system failure. Fail-safe systems are commonly used in emergency exits and fire doors to ensure rapid evacuation during crises.

Fail Secure:

On the other hand, failed secure mechanisms put security before convenience.

In a fail-secure setup, the default state of the lock is locked. The lock keeps its locked position in the event of a power loss or system failure, preventing unauthorized entry or exit. Fail-secure systems are typically employed in high-security areas and restricted access points to deter intrusions.

2. Fail Safe vs Fail Secure: When to Use?

Fail Safe:

Fail-safe locking systems work best in situations where people's safety is vital, such as fire doors, emergency exits, and locations where people need to evacuate quickly. They make sure that in an emergency, individuals can easily and quickly exit a facility.

Fail Secure:

Banks, Data centers, and Government buildings are notable places where security is their main concern. They provide enhanced safety against unwanted access and intrusions by being locked even under adverse conditions.

3. Fail Safe vs Fail Secure: Where to Use?

Fail Safe:

Fail-safe systems find application in places where rapid egress is critical, such as public buildings, schools, hospitals, and theaters. They provide occupant safety by facilitating a quick get-out during emergencies.

Fail Secure:

Fail-secure mechanisms are commonly deployed in locations requiring stringent access control, including server rooms, laboratories, financial institutions, and confidential archives. They enhance perimeter defense and prevent unwanted access to key assets.

4. Fail Safe vs Fail Secure: Advantages

Fail Safe:

• Quick evacuation: Enables quick escape in case of emergency.
• Compliance: Adheres to emergency exit safety rules.
• Minimal maintenance: Needs minimal attention to operate properly.
• User-friendly: Offers easy access throughout regular business hours.

Fail Secure:

• Increased Security: Retains locked position to prevent unwanted entry.
• Asset protection: Preserves priceless items and sensitive locations.
• Resilience: Maintains security even in the case of system malfunctions or power interruptions.
• Customizable: For specialized security solutions, it may be coupled with different access control systems.

5. Fail Safe vs Fail Secure: Disadvantages

Fail Safe:

• Intrusion vulnerability: This may unintentionally unlock during security breaches.
• Limited application: Not appropriate for high-security settings where lockdown is necessary all the time.
• Potential misuse: This may be taken advantage of by someone looking to get access without authorization.
• Power dependence: Needs a constant power source to function properly

Fail Secure:

• Restricted access: If not set up properly, it may make it difficult to escape during crises.
• Complexity: Careful set-up and upkeep are necessary to guarantee reliable locking.
• Compliance challenges: There may be requirements to adhere to particular security guidelines and standards.
• Cost: Given the increased security measures, there may be greater upfront and ongoing expenses.

6. Fail Safe vs Fail Secure: Implementation

Fail-Safe:

• Installation: Fail-safe locks are often mounted on doors with clear exits.
• Integration: To ensure synchronization with emergency procedures, integration is often carried out with fire alarm systems.
• Configuration: Required to be done for failsafe systems to unlock automatically in an emergency.

Fail Secure:

• Installation: Involves fitting fail secure locks in areas requiring strict access control.
• Integration: For complete safety, it may be integrated with biometric scanners, access control systems, and surveillance systems.
• Configuration: To maintain a locked position under all circumstances, careful calibration is needed.

7. Fail Safe vs Fail Secure: Scalability and Integration

Fail-Safe:

• Since the main objective is to allow emergency escape, fail-safe techniques may provide simpler scaling and integration alternatives.
• These techniques frequently need minimal or no complexity to interface with already installed emergency systems, such as security or fire alarms.
• Scalability might include extending the reach of emergency systems inside a structure or installing fail-safe locks on extra doors.

Fail Secure:

• As fail-secure techniques focus on preserving continuous security, they might require more complex scalability and integration.
• Integration could involve synchronizing fail-secure locks with access control systems, surveillance cameras, and other security infrastructure.
• Scalability could require careful design to guarantee that new fail-secure locks may be smoothly incorporated into the current security architecture while maintaining the overall security posture.

In summarizing this, I realize that understanding the subtle differences between fail safe and fail-secure techniques is essential to creating physical security solutions that work. Organizations may make well-informed judgments on the installation of fail safe or fail secure locking systems to successfully protect their assets and staff by evaluating the unique security needs and environmental factors.

I suggest you join Knowledgehut CISA training to enhance your cybersecurity skills and stay updated with industry best practices.

How are Fail Safe and Fail Secure similar?

Through my professional experience, I've noticed that fail safe and fail secure techniques are equally important in physical security systems, even if they differ in several essential ways.

First, access control techniques must include fail safe and secure systems. Both security and safety-focused procedures are essential for controlling access and exit points in a facility. They help to reduce overall risk and safeguard assets by limiting access.

Second, under typical circumstances, there are no similarities between fail safe and fail secure techniques that are intended to function dependably. These systems are designed to work precisely within their intended constraints, whether they are looking to prevent intrusions or unlocking to enable quick evacuation.

Furthermore, in implementing and maintaining systems, both fail safe and fail secure systems need careful consideration. Ensuring the optimal operation of these mechanisms requires extreme attention to detail and adherence to best practices, from choosing the right hardware to configuring settings and performing routine inspections.

Additionally, to increase overall effectiveness, complementary security technologies can be combined with both fail safe and fail secure techniques. Integrating them with biometric authentication systems, access control systems, or surveillance cameras can strengthen a facility's defenses even more by utilizing the synergies between various security layers.

Moreover, regulatory standards and compliance requirements apply to both fail safe and fail secure systems. Organizations need to negotiate regulatory environments to maintain legal and regulatory compliance, whether it's fulfilling security criteria for fail-secure installations or providing compliance with fire safety regulations for fail-safe equipment.

In a nutshell, I would state that even though fail safe and fail-safe differences in mechanisms and have different uses in physical security, they are equally important for personnel protection, asset protection, and preserving the integrity of security systems. To successfully execute comprehensive security plans that meet safety and security issues, it is imperative to comprehend these similarities.

Fail Safe vs Fail Secure: Misconceptions

After years of cybersecurity work, I've come across many misunderstandings about fail safe and secure procedures. Let's address a handful of the most prominent ones:

Misconception 1: Fail safe means fail secure, and vice versa.

This is probably the most common misunderstanding. Mistakenly, some people think that the phrases "fail safe" and "fail secure" are synonymous. However, it represents different ideas, such as failing safe vs failing secure locks. In such a scenario, one should know that fail secure promotes security by staying locked even in adverse situations, and fail-safe locks prioritize safety by unlocking in an emergency.

Misconception 2: Fail-safe locks are always safer than fail-secure locks.

While fail-safe locks prioritize safety in an emergency, they could not always be the best solution, depending on the circumstances. For example, fail secure locks are recommended in high-security settings where unauthorized entry poses serious risks because they keep the lock in place to keep off attackers.

Misconception 3: Fail-safe locks are immune to security breaches.

Another common misconception is that fail-safe locks are always more secure than fail-secure ones. However, if fail-safe locks fail or are not set up or maintained appropriately, they may be hacked. Malicious actors sometimes take advantage of failsafe features to obtain illegal access in times of need.

I believe that eliminating such misunderstandings is critical to establishing an in-depth understanding of fail-safe and fail-secure systems. By removing these misconceptions, we may make well-informed choices when putting in place physical security measures for protecting property and people.

What Should You Choose Between Fail Safe vs Fail Secure?

I suggest considering a number of criteria while deciding between fail-secure and fail-safe techniques. First, determine the security priorities for your organization. Fail-safe lock vs fail-secure lock in such conditions, and fail-safe lock could be a preferable option if emergency safety is of the highest priority. However, if protecting sensitive areas from unauthorized access is a top concern, fail secure systems are preferable.

Next, while evaluating fail safe vs fail secure cybersecurity, let me guide you through an example network design and how different sections should be protected with fail-safe or fail-secure procedures. 

The data center, server room, and employee workspace are the three main components of a traditional company network architecture. Each sector is important in the network's overall performance and requires security measures.

Let me take you through an example network architecture and how different areas within it should be secured with fail-safe or fail-secure mechanisms.

Let's consider a typical corporate network architecture comprising several key areas: employee workplace area, server room, and data center. Each area plays a critical role in the overall functionality of the network and requires specific security measures.

• Employee Workplace Area: This is where individual employees work and access the network for their tasks. Devices such as desktop computers, laptops, and mobile devices are commonly found here. Given the dynamic nature of employee movements and potential emergencies, a fail-safe approach is ideal. In the event of a power outage or emergency, it's crucial for employees to exit the area swiftly. Therefore, electronic door locks installed in this area should be fail-safe, ensuring that doors can be easily opened even in the absence of power.
• Server Room: The server room houses critical infrastructure such as servers, networking equipment, and storage devices. Access to this area needs to be tightly controlled to prevent unauthorized entry and potential tampering with sensitive hardware. A fail-secure approach is necessary here to ensure that only authorized personnel can access the server room. Electronic door locks should be configured as fail-secure, requiring authentication or authorization before granting access. This adds an extra layer of security to protect valuable data and infrastructure from physical threats.
• Data Center: Like the server room, the data center contains highly sensitive equipment and data repositories. However, the data center often hosts more extensive infrastructure and may require even stricter access controls. Here, a fail-secure approach is paramount to prevent unauthorized access and potential breaches. Electronic locks on data center doors should be fail-secure, requiring multi-factor authentication or access control measures such as biometrics to ensure only authorized personnel can enter.

To provide a visual understanding, here's a simple diagram illustrating the layout of these areas within the network architecture and their corresponding locking mechanisms:

Finally, the expenses and upkeep requirements of each choice will be compared. Fail-secure systems may cost more because of their greater maintenance costs and improved security features, even if fail-safe procedures may be less expensive at first.

If the question arises before me, when to use fail safe and fail secure comes down to the security requirements and risk tolerance of the organization. Determine which choice best satisfies your overall security requirements by doing a comprehensive review.

I would suggest that you upgrade your knowledge in cyber resilience by attending KnowledgeHut's best cyber security training.

Conclusion

To sum up, I want to emphasize how important fail-safe and fail-secure systems are to physical security. It is crucial to understand the differences between these techniques to create strong security methods adapted to the demands of certain organizations.

Fail-safe systems prioritize safety, facilitating swift egress during emergencies, while fail-secure mechanisms prioritize security, deterring unauthorized access to sensitive areas. Organizations may make well-informed decisions when deploying these systems by carefully evaluating the requirements of each environment while considering cost, safety, and security into account.

The total safety and protection of assets are ultimately improved by the strategic integration of fail-safe and fail-secure techniques within a security architecture. In a constantly changing threat landscape, organizations may successfully build their defenses and manage risks by correcting misunderstandings, considering several aspects, and making wise decisions.