Access control is the physical layer that connects your management software to the real world. When a tenant rents a unit online at 11pm, they expect to access it the next morning. When a tenant falls three weeks behind on rent, you need their access revoked without sending someone to change a padlock. Your software knows who rented what, and who has paid. Your access hardware decides who can open what. The gap between the two is where most facilities lose time, money and security.
Connect with us about self storage software · · Replies within 24 hours
By hand, access works like this. A tenant signs up. You give them a gate code. You walk them to their unit. You hand them a padlock key, or a combination. When they leave, you change the code. When they stop paying, you put an overlock on their unit and hope they call before trying to break in.
This process has three problems. First, it requires staff. Every move-in, move-out, and overlock action needs a person physically present or available to act. That is incompatible with the push towards unmanned or lightly staffed facilities. Second, shared gate codes are a security risk. A code shared with 200 tenants is not a security measure. Third, there is no audit trail. When something goes missing from a unit, you have no record of who accessed the facility, when, or for how long.
Integrated access control solves all three. The management software communicates directly with the access hardware. When a tenant rents online, the software assigns individual access credentials automatically. When a tenant's payment fails and the overdue grace period expires, the software revokes access automatically. Every gate entry, door opening, and unit access event is logged with a timestamp and tenant identity.
Modern self-storage access control operates at multiple layers. Understanding these layers is important because most off-the-shelf software only integrates at some of them.
The outer layer: the main gate, entrance doors, and any controlled barriers. This is where tenants enter the facility. Traditional systems use a shared keypad code. Modern systems use individual credentials: a unique PIN per tenant, a Bluetooth signal from their phone, or an RFID card. The key difference is that individual credentials create an access log. You know exactly who entered the facility and when.
For multi-floor or multi-building facilities, internal doors and lifts can be controlled separately. A tenant with a unit on the second floor gets four things. The main gate. The building entrance. The lift, to the second floor only. The corridor to their unit. They do not get access to other floors or buildings. Access by zone lowers the security risk, and gives you finer data on who went where.
The innermost layer: the individual unit. Traditional facilities use tenant-supplied padlocks, which gives the operator no control over access once the tenant has the key. Smart locks (such as Noke) replace the padlock with a Bluetooth-enabled lock that the tenant opens via a mobile app. The operator can grant, restrict, or revoke access remotely. Overlocking puts a second lock on a unit, so nobody can open it. The software can do that by itself when a tenant does not pay.
| System | Technology | Unit-level locks | Software integration |
|---|---|---|---|
| Noke Smart Entry | Bluetooth smart locks. Tenants use a mobile app to unlock gates, doors, and individual unit locks. No keys, no codes. | Yes. Noke One padlock replaces traditional padlocks with Bluetooth access. | Owned by Storable (same parent as SiteLink). Integrates with Stora (Advanced/Premium tiers), SiteLink, and other platforms via API. |
| PTI Security | Keypads, card readers, and gate controllers. Individual PIN codes or RFID credentials per tenant. Established in the US and UK markets. | Gate and door level. PTI does not manufacture unit-level smart locks; unit security typically relies on tenant-supplied padlocks or third-party overlocking. | Integrates with Stora (Advanced/Premium), SiteLink, and other major platforms. Strong API for custom integration. |
| Paxton | UK-based access control manufacturer. Net2 and Paxton10 systems support card, fob, PIN, and mobile credentials. Widely used across commercial buildings, with growing self-storage adoption. | Door and gate level. Control at each unit needs more hardware for every unit, which adds significant cost at scale. | Integrates with Stora (Advanced/Premium). Paxton's open API allows custom integration with bespoke systems. |
| BearBox | Smart padlock designed specifically for self-storage. Bluetooth-enabled, managed via app, with remote access control by the operator. | Yes. Designed as a direct smart padlock replacement for storage units. | Integrates with Stora (Advanced/Premium). API available for custom integration. |
Noke (pronounced "no key") is the most prominent smart lock system in the self-storage industry. It is owned by Storable, the same US company that owns SiteLink. The system works entirely via Bluetooth: tenants download the Noke app, and their phone becomes their key. There are no physical keys, no codes to remember, and no shared credentials.
The Noke One smart padlock replaces the traditional padlock on a storage unit. The operator keeps control throughout. They open access when a tenant rents. They close it when a payment is missed. They end it when the tenant moves out. All of that happens from the software, from anywhere. Every unlock event is logged with a timestamp and the tenant's identity.
For perimeter access, Noke offers smart controllers for gates, doors, and lifts. They use the same Bluetooth credentials. One app on the telephone of a tenant then opens the gate, the building door and their own unit lock.
Noke requires tenants to have a smartphone with Bluetooth enabled. For tenants without smartphones (a real consideration for certain demographics), fallback options are limited. The system depends on Bluetooth range, which can be affected by thick metal doors and concrete construction common in storage facilities. Battery life on smart padlocks, while typically lasting over a year, creates a maintenance requirement that traditional padlocks do not have. And because Noke is owned by Storable, the long-term pricing and availability of the product is tied to Storable's commercial decisions.
PTI is an established access control manufacturer with a long history in self-storage. Their products focus on perimeter and building access: keypads, card readers, gate controllers, and barrier systems. A PTI system gives each tenant their own credential, a PIN code or an RFID card. That gives you an audit trail, and control over each person. A shared code gives you neither.
PTI's strength is reliability and proven deployment at scale. Thousands of facilities worldwide use PTI hardware. The keypads and controllers are designed for outdoor and harsh environments common at storage sites.
PTI does not manufacture unit-level smart locks. Their systems control gates, doors, and barriers, but individual unit access still relies on tenant-supplied padlocks or separate overlocking hardware. This means the "automatic overlock on non-payment" workflow requires either a separate smart lock product (like Noke or BearBox) or a manual overlocking process. For operators wanting full automation from gate to unit, PTI alone does not complete the chain.
Paxton is a UK-based access control manufacturer headquartered in Brighton. Their Net2 and Paxton10 systems are widely used in commercial buildings, offices, and residential developments. The systems support multiple credential types: cards, fobs, PINs, and mobile access via the Paxton Key app.
For self-storage, Paxton's strength is its UK presence, support network, and open API. Installers are readily available across the country. The system integrates with Stora's Advanced and Premium tiers, and the API allows custom integration with bespoke management systems.
Paxton was not designed specifically for self-storage. It excels at door and gate control but adding unit-level access (a controller per unit) becomes expensive at scale. A 200-unit site would need 200 door controllers, and a reader at each unit. That costs far more than a smart padlock such as Noke or BearBox. Paxton is best suited to perimeter and building access, with a separate solution for unit-level control.
BearBox is a smart padlock designed specifically for self-storage. Like Noke, it replaces the traditional padlock with a Bluetooth-enabled lock managed via a mobile app. The operator retains remote control: grant, restrict, and revoke access based on rental and payment status.
BearBox integrates with Stora's Advanced and Premium tiers. Its API is available for custom integration with other management systems. The product is designed as a straightforward padlock replacement, which makes retrofitting existing facilities simpler than installing unit-level door controllers.
BearBox arrived after Noke. Fewer sites use it, and there is less public data on how it lasts in different UK conditions. Like Noke, it requires tenants to have smartphones and creates a battery maintenance requirement.
Here is the core problem: off-the-shelf management platforms only integrate with the access control systems they have chosen to partner with. Stora integrates with Noke, PTI, Paxton, and BearBox, but only on its Advanced and Premium tiers (£149 and £299 per month). SiteLink integrates with Noke natively (same parent company) and with other systems via its marketplace. Storeganise offers automatic unit lockout but specific hardware integrations vary.
Your site may use another access system, or hardware older than the smart lock. You then have two choices. Replace the hardware to match the partners your software supports. Or run access by hand, next to a system that does everything else for you.
Neither option is ideal. Replacing working access control hardware is expensive and disruptive. Managing access manually defeats the purpose of an automated management system.
The first line of this article names the whole problem. The software knows who paid. The hardware knows who can open a door. Neither knows what the other means.
That is not a fault of either vendor. The software declares a tenant and a unit in its own form. The lock maker declares a credential and a door in another. The bridge between them is a connection one vendor chose to build, for one partner. That is why the supported list is short, and why older hardware is left out.
A shared foundation moves that work. A tenant, a unit, a credential, a door and an access grant are declared once, for every operator system. A connection to a lock maker is built once against the foundation, and every facility with that hardware has it. A grant is narrow by design. It covers one door, for one period, and every use is logged.
We explain that in bespoke software for a whole sector. We describe the market it creates in what does an interoperable software market look like.
Before committing to an access control system (or a management platform based on its access control integrations), assess the following:
Connect with us about self storage software · · Replies within 24 hours