Today, smart door locks have become commonplace in households across the country, and the convenience of “entering with a facial scan” has spared many people the hassle of forgetting their keys.

However, recent news reports have frequently highlighted failures in smart lock facial recognition: some people have used a high-resolution photo to unlock their neighbor’s door; others have been unable to enter their own homes after multiple attempts due to backlighting; and in even more alarming cases, criminals have breached security using 3D-printed facial models.

These incidents not only put users in awkward situations but have also cast serious doubt on the security of facial recognition technology—why are there frequent security breaches in the “smart guardians” we rely on?

Where exactly do the security vulnerabilities in facial recognition lie?

Many people choose smart door locks with facial recognition precisely because of the seemingly “foolproof” technologies touted in advertisements, such as “3D structured light” and “liveness detection.” Yet in actual use, these technologies are not as reliable as one might imagine.

From a technical perspective, the risks associated with facial recognition stem primarily from the limitations of the algorithms: if the algorithm cannot sufficiently distinguish between similar facial features, it may result in “false positives” when encountering people who look alike; furthermore, recognition accuracy drops significantly when the face is partially obscured—for example, by a mask or hat—or when there are significant differences in appearance due to makeup.

Secondly, environmental interference poses a major challenge. Direct strong light can blur facial details, backlighting makes it difficult for cameras to capture clear images, and even extreme temperatures—whether too low or too high—can affect the normal operation of sensors.

More critically, many manufacturers, in their rush to capture market share, focus their marketing on convenient features like “instant unlocking” and “remote control,” while glossing over potential security vulnerabilities in the technology. They neither proactively inform users about the risks of “photo attacks” or “model attacks” nor remind users to regularly update system firmware. Consumers, drawn in by “cutting-edge technology,” overlook these hidden security risks, ultimately leaving their home security exposed to danger.

It’s Not About Rejecting Smart Technology, but About the Need for a More Reliable “Security Lock”

Of course, we are not dismissing the value of smart locks—after all, the original purpose of technology is to make life safer and more convenient. The crux of the matter is this: when facial recognition technology cannot yet completely eliminate risks, do we have a more reliable biometric solution? After all, home security concerns the safety of both property and family members, and there is no room for complacency.

Among the many biometric technologies available, fingerprint recognition has long been a top choice for smart locks due to its high uniqueness and ease of use. However, traditional fingerprint recognition also has its shortcomings: wet or worn fingers, or even counterfeit silicone replicas created by criminals, can all cause recognition to fail.

However, with technological advancements, a more secure live fingerprint recognition technology is breaking through these limitations. This is Xingqihang Technology’s multi-tissue layer vital sign analysis technology based on infrared light.

Infrared Live Fingerprint Recognition: From “Fingerprint Recognition” to “Verifying Life”

The core of Xingqihang Technology’s solution lies in no longer relying solely on the “visual characteristics” of fingerprints, but rather in deeply detecting “vital signs”—which fundamentally eliminates the possibility of prosthetic attacks.

The underlying technology is not complicated: a specific wavelength of near-infrared light is directed at the finger; the light penetrates the epidermis to reach the underlying muscle and vascular tissue, capturing the absorption characteristics of oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO₂) in the blood at specific wavelengths. It is important to note that blood oxygen saturation is a dynamically changing physiological indicator. Only a genuine, living finger exhibits this characteristic; any lifeless prosthetic, such as a silicone fingerprint model, cannot simulate this “vital sign.”

Building on this, Xingqihang Technology has established a “dual-verification” security architecture: The first layer is “live physiological authentication,” where the infrared sensing system uses proprietary algorithms to match blood oxygen characteristics, instantly detecting prosthetics; The second layer is “high-precision identity authentication,” where a fingerprint sensor with 508 dpi resolution precisely extracts fingerprint features to confirm the user’s identity.

The door lock will only unlock when both layers of verification are successfully passed. More importantly, no biometric images are stored throughout the entire process, eliminating the risk of privacy breaches at the source.

The Human Touch in Technology Should Be Rooted in “Security”

The “setbacks” faced by smart locks aren’t the fault of the technology itself, but rather the result of our pursuit of ‘convenience’ occasionally overshadowing our focus on “security.” For companies, developing smart products requires more than just focusing on marketing gimmicks; they must devote greater effort to refining technology and conducting security testing. For users, when choosing a smart lock, they should avoid falling into the marketing traps of “instant unlocking” and “cutting-edge tech,” and instead pay closer attention to the product’s security certifications and protection mechanisms.

Xinqihang Technology’s live fingerprint recognition technology may point the way forward: the core of a smart lock should not be “how cool” it is, but “how reliable.” When technology can truly safeguard the security of our homes—freeing us from worries about “strangers gaining entry via facial recognition” and the frustration of “failed access attempts”—that is the kind of intelligence we truly need to enhance our lives. After all, the security of our homes is the foundation of all the good things in life.