I’m so frustrated. I set up a Wyze camera in my mom’s home, partly to monitor my sister, who lives there, out of concerns we are having about who she brings in the home. This same sister, was able to take the camera and set it up under her own account! Without our permission, and now she is the primary account person managing the camera! How in the world could this happen! She’s the reason we got the camera and now she has control?! Makes no sense and this needs to be fixed. I have no idea how I’m going to put the camera back in my moms Wyze account and keep her from doing it again.
It’s easy to put it back to your mums account, press and hold the setup button on the camera until you hear a beep and “Ready to Connect” then tap the Next button in the app.
Keeping her from setting it up on her own account in future isn’t really the issue here.
Even if the camera was locked to your mums account. Your sister still has physical access which gives her ultimate control.
She could unplug it, cover the lens or just smash it with a hammer.
Even if you put the camera in a tamper proof box your sister could still cover the box or turn off the wireless router which would stop you from controlling it. She could even turn off the electricity to the whole house.
So the only realistic way to stop your sister tampering with your security camera would be if she didn’t know it was there.
I’m not suggesting you should hide it or spy on her, Just pointing out the limitations of all security cameras ever made.
If a person has physical access to the camera, they can stop you watching them one way or another if they want to or have something to hide.
Another layer of bureaucracy. Just something to chew on. Would the community be willing to register their MAC address with a second agency? I am sure there would be a small cost but it would forbid new registrations of a unit without a pin code issued by this agency. Maybe we are just putting too much effort into a $20 camera. It could track an attempt to use a stolen camera.
Yeah this is a lose/lose for Wyze. Just imagine all of the calls from people who bought the camera used from someone who didn’t “release it” from their account. Then Wyze gets to deal with the backlash from people who can’t use the camera because either they can’t get ahold of the seller or the seller refuses to do anything.
Is your sister an adult? The problem you have is that the home is her residence. Whether you agree with her actions or not, you have no standing when it comes to video recorders inside her residence. Unfortunately next to a court order, there is nothing you can do. Depending on the state it could very well be illegal to do without her permission because it is her residence. Please note that this comment is in no way a comment on you, your sister or anything going on between you. I don’t know the circumstances that lead to this dynamic, I just know the issues that can arise from it. How do I know? From being in THE EXACT SAME SITUATION. I do feel for you, it is a really tough situation.
I don’t know of any such third party agency that would do what your suggesting.
If such an agency does exist, no one would want to pay a monthly fee to stop a £20 camera being used after it was stolen.
So wyze would have to spend time developing this feature which no one would use.
They could make the feature compulsory at setup but then no one will buy the camera as it would come with a monthly fee for an unwanted feature.
Very bad idea.
However this feature might be useful for the Outdoor Camera Wyze is working on.
So what benefit would it give on an outdoor camera that’s worth paying a monthly fee for and how much would you pay each month for this feature.
I would like to see a feature on the app to lock our cameras to our account in case they are stolen then they can’t be used elsewhere, and if we give it away or sell it just go into the app and touch a button to release it to work on another network.
I’m sure we all leave stuff outside that’s way more valuable than a Wyzecam.
Plants, tables, chairs, ceiling fans and lights on verandas. Not to mention all the expensive stuff we have indoors.
Locking a cheap camera so no one else can use it isn’t worth the effort. Especially considering all the times people will inevitably get locked out of their account ending up with a useless camera.
Fair enough. I added and then took back a vote once I realized the “your clips move with your donated camera” problem is reported to be fixed. Referred in via
Sorry to hear about your friend.
I personally would not welcome this feature as it could cause all sorts of problems for genuine users.
The Wyze cams are so cheap it’s not worth the effort to add this feature especially when there are other more beneficial features that could be added.
For a better chance of catching thrives I have multiple cameras that overlap and cover each other with cameras hidden wherever possible or as inaccessible as I can make them. Outdoor cameras in full view and fairly easy to get to are watched by other cameras inside of high up on the building. That way if someone steals or disables a camera I have others that could pick up / record what’s happening.
Not infallible but it gives me more chance of identifying / catching a thief than bricking the camera after it’s stolen.
I disagree. Being able to “report” a stolen camera via the Wyze account and disabling it’s future use on any account would be useful. Amazon firesticks have that provision…cool feature.
Would be great to have a feature in the app so as to “report” a stolen camera and to permanently disable it from future use on a different account. I think there’s a feature like that related to firesticks.
Like I said, not worth implementing when there are other much more beneficial features to be added.
A stolen camera can’t be used to make purchases like a stolen firestick could.
Reporting it stolen won’t get your camera back.
So what benefit do you see that’s worth prioritising this feature other than you think it’s cool.
Like I said, disabling a stolen camera from use is the desired feature. Did I stutter?
No. And it’s still a bad idea.
Like I already said in this thread , IMO , " it is not necessary for this to be implemented" , it’s just a bad idea period, I will agree to disagree
Requiring release or being able to lock a camera would be a great feature to have. Thieves should be rewarded with a brick, not a useable product. For those folks dissenting on the idea, saying " it’s just an inexpensive product what’s the big deal" send me some cameras please…they’re only $20 each plus shipping.