IEC 62368-3:2026 Makes Liveness Detection Mandatory

On June 3, 2026, the IEC formally released IEC 62368-3:2026, a new part of the safety standard framework for audio/video, information, and communication equipment that specifically addresses biometric sensors. The point drawing the most industry attention is that resistance to photo, video, and mask spoofing through Liveness Detection is now written as a mandatory requirement under Clause 7.3.2. For exporters of products such as smart locks and medical IoT wearable devices, this is not just a standards update; it is a direct compliance issue that now touches product design, certification timing, and customer-facing delivery plans.

What the new IEC release explicitly sets out

According to the provided event information, the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) officially published IEC 62368-3:2026 on June 3, 2026 under the title Audio/video, information and communication technology equipment safety — Part 3: Particular requirements for biometric sensors. The release introduces, for the first time, a mandatory clause on Liveness Detection anti-spoofing capability. Clause 7.3.2 requires resistance against attacks using photos, videos, and masks.

The scope highlighted in the provided information includes export products such as smart locks and medical IoT wearable terminals. The same information also states that major certification bodies, including TÜV, SGS, and Intertek, have already begun accepting related applications.

Where the immediate business impact is likely to appear

Export-oriented device makers will face a nearer-term compliance checkpoint

From an industry perspective, manufacturers shipping smart locks, medical IoT wearables, and other products that use biometric sensors are the most directly exposed group. The reason is straightforward: the update concerns a mandatory requirement, and major certification bodies are already accepting cases. The practical impact is likely to appear in certification preparation, product validation, and export project scheduling rather than in abstract policy discussion.

Biometric sensor integration and product engineering teams will need closer alignment

Analysis shows that this development may affect teams responsible for integrating biometric sensing functions into finished devices. Because the requirement is tied to anti-spoofing performance against photos, videos, and masks, attention is likely to shift toward how liveness-related capabilities are documented, tested, and presented during conformity assessment. Even where the sensor is only one subsystem, the compliance burden may surface at the finished-product level.

Certification and testing service workflows are moving into execution mode

The fact that TÜV, SGS, and Intertek have started accepting applications means this is already entering operational handling. For service providers, compliance coordinators, and quality teams, the main change is that the standard is no longer a watchlist item alone. It now has a concrete processing path, which may affect file readiness, test sequencing, and communication between brands, manufacturers, and certification bodies.

Buyers and channel-side stakeholders may tighten technical documentation requests

Observably, procurement teams and channel partners involved in export business may begin asking more specific questions around biometric sensor compliance, especially for product categories named in the released information. The likely impact is less about immediate market conclusions and more about whether suppliers can clearly explain certification status, applicable scope, and expected timing.

What companies should review now

Check whether current export models fall within the affected product scope

What deserves closer attention is whether existing or planned export products include biometric sensor functions in categories such as smart locks or medical IoT wearable terminals. For companies with overlapping product portfolios, the first practical step is usually internal scope confirmation rather than assuming all devices are affected in the same way.

Reassess certification schedules against active acceptance by major bodies

Because major certification organizations are already accepting applications, companies should pay attention to how this may interact with shipment plans, model launches, and customer commitments. The key issue is not to infer requirements beyond the provided facts, but to recognize that application channels are open and that timing risks may become more visible once certification planning starts.

Prepare technical and compliance materials around Clause 7.3.2

Analysis shows that teams handling regulatory documentation, product specifications, and customer submissions should be ready to address Clause 7.3.2 directly. In practical terms, that means checking whether internal materials clearly describe how the product handles liveness-related anti-spoofing expectations for photo, video, and mask attacks, and whether this can be communicated consistently to labs and customers.

Separate the published requirement from future interpretation details

It is also important to distinguish between the confirmed fact of publication and any later interpretation or implementation detail that may emerge in practice. Companies should avoid assuming uniform enforcement scenarios beyond the released information, while still tracking how certification bodies and customers apply the requirement in real projects.

Why this looks like more than a routine standards update

As an editorial observation, this development is better understood as a clear compliance signal rather than a speculative policy trend. The confirmed change is narrow but consequential: anti-spoofing capability through Liveness Detection has moved into mandatory language within an IEC standard part focused on biometric sensors. That shift matters because it changes the discussion from optional feature strength to required conformity in at least the product contexts identified in the provided information.

At the same time, it is more appropriate to understand this as an actionable standard release, not as a basis for sweeping claims about the entire biometric market. The current information supports a firm conclusion on the publication itself and on the start of acceptance by major certification bodies, but broader commercial effects still need to be observed through implementation.

How this should be read at this stage

For the industry, the immediate meaning of IEC 62368-3:2026 is that liveness-based anti-spoofing is no longer only a technical preference in the contexts identified by the release. It has entered the compliance conversation as a mandatory requirement under Clause 7.3.2. A rational reading today is that affected exporters, engineering teams, and certification functions should treat this as a present operational issue, while remaining cautious about drawing wider conclusions until more implementation experience becomes visible.

Basis of this article and what still needs verification

This article is based on the user-provided news title, event date, and event summary concerning the June 3, 2026 release of IEC 62368-3:2026 and the stated start of acceptance by TÜV, SGS, and Intertek. For this type of industry update, commonly relevant source categories would include official notices, standard-organization documents, certification body updates, company disclosures, industry association materials, and reporting by authoritative trade media. A specific official source link was not provided in the input, so the exact document path and any subsequent implementation clarifications still require ongoing verification. Follow-up attention should focus on how the published requirement is interpreted in certification practice for affected export products.