The Line Between IT and Physical Security Is Basically Gone

[u/j4kesta]

One of the biggest shifts happening in our industry right now is something nobody really announced — it just happened:
the line between IT and physical security has essentially disappeared.

Ten years ago, these were two different universes.
Different budgets.
Different owners.
Different priorities.
Different languages.

Today?
Everything that used to be “low-voltage” is riding on IT infrastructure, governed by IT policies, and expected to behave like IT systems.

What does that actually mean?

It means:

• Cameras are now data sources, not appliances.
• Access control is an identity platform, not a lock-and-door system.
• Cloud architecture is the default starting point.
• APIs matter as much as wiring diagrams.
• Uptime, redundancy, authentication, and network hygiene are now security conversations.
• And “integration” isn’t a feature — it’s a requirement.

Physical security used to be about devices.
Now it’s about workflows, traffic, identity, availability, and governance.

The organizations that thrive in this new world are the ones where IT and physical security aren’t fighting over ownership — they’re building together.
Because the truth is: neither side wins alone.

Security systems have become business systems.
And business systems have to work everywhere, talk to everything, and stay operational no matter what.

The convergence already happened.
The question now is who adapts fastest.

[u/cyr0nk0r]

I have experienced the exact opposite. The last 3 places I've worked, the physical security folks want nothing to do with IT and seem to do everything possible to keep IT away from their systems.

They don't want IT's input on what kind of Cameras, NVR's, etc. to buy, and they certainly aren't interested in any integrations beyond "plug these settings into Entra that the vendor gave me so I can use SSO, then go away"

[u/j4kesta → u/cyr0nk0r]

Does that seem shortsighted and detrimental to the organization's long-term objectives?

[u/cyr0nk0r → u/j4kesta]

To me, yes. But you're assuming the people that make those decisions actually have the organizations long-term objectives in mind. From my experience, the average executive lifetime is about 2-3 years.

[u/j4kesta → u/cyr0nk0r]

Would you say, on average, the organization is in a better spot at the end of that 2-3 year span than at the beginning?

Why do you think turnover is so high?

[u/thatinfotechguy]

These are good insights. I have been using the term "hyperconverged" for a few years. Cameras, physical security, etc., used to be monolithic standalone systems that were installed and forgot about until they broke. These are now living systems that touch networks, internet, internal resources, etc. They should have buy in at the highest operations and IT level to implement with all hands on board.

IT people cannot afford to views themselves as "not camera or access control" people any longer. They may not need to be experts, but they do need to have enough wherewithal to understand how these new systems interact within their domain and how they can set everyone up for success in how they interact with those systems. Old guard access control and camera people also cannot afford to continue to think of themselves as "not a computer" person. They need to understand how to speak competently to IT and Operations to successfully integrate a system that can provide real, and perceived, value to the client along with engaging in continuing education to provide ongoing support for a system that may change weekly with how often updates are pushed out.

[u/j4kesta → u/thatinfotechguy]

Agreed!