First, this practice does involve invasion of privacy.
For people, it is their freedom to choose who to live with. The relationship between two people living together has nothing to do with property. After all, the relationship between two people belongs to their personal privacy. If the property is forced to issue a certificate, it does involve infringing on the privacy of others to a certain extent. What's more, the property move is also somewhat unscientific, because for both parties living together, if it is okay in one unit, at least everyone in the unit knows that it is not difficult to open a certificate, although it will make colleagues in the unit laugh. But if two people are not in the same unit, how can the unit open this certificate? After all, the unit can't prove it in this matter. It can be seen that this move not only involves invasion of privacy, but also has certain coercion.
Second, it can't help prevent and control the epidemic in a practical sense.
Although it is said that the community asked residents to show this certificate on the grounds of epidemic prevention and control, in fact, this move did not help the epidemic prevention and control. Because for the property, they need to control the people who actually live in the community. In other words, they only need to register the residents in the community and carry out relevant inspections. As for the relationship between cohabitants, it does not actually affect their control. After all, the property only needs to know which building, which family and who live in the community.
Generally speaking, this move of residential property does involve invasion of personal privacy, and these measures are not helpful for epidemic prevention and control.