Wyze Cam v4 on the way. But you shouldn’t patronize this company.

by

Hot on the heels of the new Wyze Battery Cam Pro, the company is prepared to increment the Wyze Cam v3 — which is possibly their best selling and most highly regarded WiFi camera.

The upcoming Wyze Cam v4 quite clearly picks up a spotlight, as shown above and sourced from the publicly available Android app. While the Wyze Cam v3 Pro (and OG model) also contains a spotlight, thus far that higher tier of branding denotes 2k resolution (which doesn’t actually speak to image quality)… so one might safely assume that the Wyze Cam v4 clocks in at 1080p. As to other likely assumptions, the Wyze Cam Plus Lite plan probably won’t be available, given the company’s enhanced focus on subscription revenue. The Wyze Cam v4 carries forward the original Wyze Cam’s housing and mount tradition (vs the OG’s more simplistic post), with just slight rounding of some previously sharper edges. And perhaps they’ll make the jump to USB-C, as they have with the Battery Cam Pro. I’d personally also be expecting a greater field of view, certainly more than the v3 Pro’s range.

But as compelling as Wyze’s pricing, color night vision, and illusion of hipness have been, I cannot recommend anyone purchase or utilize their hardware and services given a recent incident in which up to 2300 users had access to the live camera feeds of ten households. From the reddit chatter, this may have included strangers peeking in on a monitored special needs person.

This was Wyze’s LastPass tipping point. After X number of incidents, we’ve been sufficiently forewarned. Wyze’s seemingly substandard operational practices (as we not-so-fondly remember those bricked robot vacs and contact sensors) and lax security posture seem baked into their corporate DNA — with that knowledge, consumers (and Roku, Inc) should be prepared for more of the same or to simply jump ship. Which is my recommendation. The New York Times Wirecutter has landed upon similar:

We believe Wyze is acting irresponsibly to its customers. As such, we’ve made the difficult but unavoidable decision to revoke our recommendation of all Wyze cameras until the company implements meaningful changes to its security and privacy procedures. The concern is not that Wyze had a security incident—just about every company or organization in the world will probably have to deal with some sort of security trip-up […] The greater issue is how this company responds to a crisis. With this incident, and others in the past, it’s clear Wyze has failed to develop the sorts of robust procedures that adequately protect its customers the way they deserve. The fundamental relationship between smart-home companies and their customers is founded on trust. No company can guarantee safety and security 100% of the time, but customers need to be confident that those who make and sell these products, especially security devices, are worthy of their trust. Wyze’s inability to meet these basic standards puts its customers and its devices at risk

39 thoughts on “Wyze Cam v4 on the way. But you shouldn’t patronize this company.”

  1. Like Wyze mods remove posts and threads on the company’s corporate reddit, I may similarly remove comments here — to include antisocial responses and personal attacks, suggest the article hasn’t been read or understood, are otherwise off-topic, and in situations where there’s even the faintest whiff of astroturfing.

  2. I generally like Wirecutter, as it’s much better than Consumer Reports, but they really botched it on this Wyze incident. This wasn’t a security breach but instead a technical glitch, and unlike prior incidents Wyze acted promptly and responsibly. Sad to see Zatz making the same judgment.

    I would add IMHO any article mentioning security cameras should include a warning about how foolhardy it is to put a security camera inside your house. I only have one inside, and it’s a Wyze Pan Cam v3 which basically points the camera downward when turned off, so you know you’re not being monitored. I only use it when I’m on vacation. Other than that, all my security cameras are either outside or in the garage.

  3. No cams indoors has been my position for years. If it’s on the Internet, it can be accessed. However, Wyze has a long history of shoddy, well, everything. So, yes, while this was a technical mishap (that dropped a security/privacy control) it was also par for their course. Hiding threads/posts also does not reflect well on claims of transparency.

  5. Great on your policy, so just a reminder to always mention the warning in any article covering the topic. Many people don’t think about that sort of thing when they’re [not] researching purchases.

    And again, I think it’s more how a company responds at this point in history. Virtually every company is likely to have some sort of a security incident at some point in time. It’s how they respond that is important. Is the response quick? Do they notify those affected?

  7. One more security comment about cameras, or virtually any IOT device. Put them on your guest network! These things don’t need to talk to each other (even Echo devices don’t need to), and most as a practical matter cannot be updated short of replacing them.

  8. I mean, Samsung had phones actually explode in people’s pockets but that brand is still highly recommended. You get what you pay for. If you want a security camera in a compromising position don’t spend $25 on it. If somebody wants to go through the trouble of hacking into my account to watch my chickens, more power to em. Consumer responsibility is a real thing. Know how you plan on using something and purchase accordingly.

  9. Agreed. And that’s what you, me, Kary are doing here – helping to educate folks, as there’s frequently more to the story than the corporate narrative (that has excised one of the cofounders from their origin tale, for reasons unknown) and marketing materials.

  10. I was going to mention Samsung for a different, more pertinent reason. What they did with the A53 late last year, early this year, was horrendous. Despite promising monthly security updates they went for something like 5 months without one, during which time there was a known security exploit affecting the phone that required no user interaction. Samsung didn’t contact customers directly, and their advice was to make changes to phone settings that didn’t exist on the phone. It took so long to get an update out (over six months from discovery) that the vulnerability was made public.

  11. Wyze cams were loved and appreciated earlier, however, their focus trends towards subscription revenues rather than product consistency. While many features may work initially, equally as many are not accessible due to constant programming changes. Not all customers want to join monthly payments or require cloud, but would rather prefer use of installed chips to review events. An advantage of enabling cams to record instantaneously is certainly a great wish.
    Too many revenue driven products.

  12. Their update bricked my newest camera 3 weeks ago and so far not a single response I too am rethinking my support of their products honestly if don’t care why should i

  13. All online services are at constant risk of either being hacked for having technical mishaps, doesn’t mean you have to try to dog them. Also the wyze cans have custom firmware to take them offline and use them in your own NVR . Which I will eventually switch them to once I build one.

  14. Wyze has more than that incident in their closet.

    Like when a complete copy of their customer database, including biometrics from their alpha test with watches and scales in China, wide open to everyone.

    I have three of them, all pointed outside and using free cam lite plus and local SD card recording.

  15. One other thing. Wirecutter was great before they got bought by the NYT.

    I noticed after that their recommendations had more to do with who was paying them a good fee for a recommendation than the best product.

    I disagreed with one of their articles thesis that you can’t buy a decent set of cookware for under $500. Two of their authors thought it was funny on twitter/x when I disagreed.

    Anyone who has bought and used a Kirkland Signature or Members Mark set for around $200 knows that’s a bunch of boolshoot.

  17. Wyze has lost my business permanently. I was having wifi issues with their products(doesnt everyone?). Eventually I upgraded to a reolink system. I had the wyze $99 for 99 camera subscription for cam plus and was under the impression you could cancel anytime and be refunded and that would mean there was no option to cancel and continue what you paid for. But little did I know that wyze aligned with its corporate movement to scrape as much subscription fees as possible decided to change its policy to “cancel anytime, no refunds are given” so wyze has definitely lost a customer here forever!

    Considering how well the reolink hardware works at 2x the price of a wyze cam, I recommend everyone broaden their horizons especially on a product that’s designed to secure and surveillance ones home.

  18. Ray, I don’t begrudge the company wanting to maximize revenue. In fact, better finances could result in better services, security, support, improved product lifecycle… as I too have a problem with unresolved issues and apparently pre-mature product abandonment. When so much of the product lineup is white-labeled and outsourced to various orgs, perhaps it’s the inevitable outcome. Given that and how/when they/we lost the original edge AI partner, I wonder if they don’t or didn’t have much contract skill to better protect their/customers products longevity.

  19. I always giggle to myself when I see complaints about security for low-priced hardware and services. Everyone wishes that you could get top-notch security for little to nothing but it’s all wishes and dreams.

    I have several of the cameras but I also am aware of the limitations, the risks and the benefits. I can see events at places that I care about but I have limited ability to interact with that information and I’m also very aware of the limited privacy of that data. I also have some fairly expensive cameras for my more high level security needs. Those I can control the access behind a SHA-256 firewall, maintain my own data privately and interact with the event live, if I so choose. They are expensive and comparatively difficult to use. With great power comes great resp… ah, you know the line.

    The user above that discussed Wirecutter and the profit motive for the reviews is spot on. I used to patronize Consumer Reports back in the day until it was discovered that they took “donations” and “sponsorships” from major manufacturers that put certain products significantly up in the rankings compared to products OBVIOUSLY superior that did not play the payola scheme. NYT is a juggernaut of profit motive so I would trust little produced from such an outlet.

  20. Wyze has a mixed history as far as security goes but I use them.
    I believe that when using ANY security camera you must place it with the idea of considering how damaging would it be for someone else to have access to what the camera can see or hear.

  21. On Consumer Reports vs. Wirecutter (which I don’t remember before NYT), Wirecutter is clearly better. CR almost always recommends consumers spend far more than they need to (e.g. more powerful computers than necessary for the task indicated, or expensive brands). It’s very predictable, so much so they’ve practically become an advertising agency. Even worse, much of their advice is just downright bad (e.g. generators) with the authors not being subject matter experts. I don’t know if it’s still true, but five years ago they still hadn’t discovered inverter microwaves, making their reviews entirely pointless.

    While only a short time reader, I’ve yet to notice any of that with Wirecutter, and they recently saved me a ton. The spouse expressed interest in an expensive item I thought frivolous and didn’t really want personally. Shortly later Wirecutter had reviews on the product, and highly recommended a product that was well less than half the higher priced ones they reviewed (and the one she wanted). I bought it as a surprise, and not only does the wife love it, but I use it too. I was afraid it would sit unused after a month. Anyway, a four figure savings, unless maybe it’s assumed I wouldn’t have spent the larger amount.

  22. Well I guess I’m not the only customer having severe problems with Wyze. I have FIVE V3 cameras that no longer work. They updated my firmware which KILLED all 5 cameras.
    Weeks have passed and NO fix.

  23. Wirecutter, like Consumer Reports, is hit or miss for me. For smart home, I have a lot of respect for the team and Rachel Cericola in particular. Other verticals, less so. Beyond some SEO shenanigans, they have a bunch of blind spots — as was mentioned above, outside of like mattresses, rarely consider Costco/Sams house brands and IKEA for quality solutions.

  24. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a good CR review on any topic, but yeah I’ve seen WC stuff I didn’t agree with too.

  25. This was a technical glitch that was blown out of proportion. I’m happy with my wyze products and I’ll continue to use and buy more of them. This new v4 sounds like a great new cam. I love my v3 built into the floodlight and hopefully the v4 will be able to be used on the floodlight as well, as an add on cam.

  26. I will not buy their cameras. I do have cameras indoor. I had 2 step auth on my account and someone was still able to gain access. They were trying to activate SOS, calling my kids [profanity], that he was going to kill them, etc. It was very scary. I contacted the company and all the do is tell you to change your password. WHAT A JOKE

  27. I’ve used Wyze products over several years. Started with the early cameras then added V2 and V3 cameras. Most of my 11 cameras point outside, but 3 point inside and are part of a group automatically shut off while I’m home. For the most part, they work ok as they only supplement primary cameras on UniFi and Synology systems.

    I got slammed when Wyze dropped support for the V1 contact switches and motion detectors, they were nice and small and worked great. They occasionally still work when I bother to reset the back-of-the-v1-camera interface.

    As to security, let’s not forget the 3-year interval during which Wyze knew about but failed to fix a vulnerability that allowed hackers to view stored video. Arrgh.

    As others have mentioned, you get what you pay for. I still recommend Wyze cameras to the odd non-technical person who simply wants 1 or 2 cameras to monitor non-critical areas.

  28. Dave is 100% on target, too bad I found out after spending close to 1000.00 on Wyze beta junk. Not only the security beaches, but they fail to stand behind their products, even when their firmware updates brick your camera on day 1 of install. And I have a sense if big brother came knocking that Wyze is likely to bend over and give them all your video, without your consent.
    Run, RUN AWAY FROM WYZE

  29. Wirecutter recommended eufi cams. Do you? I mean the issue Anker had was even worse than wyze. And every cloud based camera system will do the same. And if it’s not cloud based and connected to remote view you are vulnerable.

  30. I don’t know that Eufy’s security shortcomings have been worse, but I’ve certainly raised their issues in multiple venues, multiple times. Some examples:

    https://twitter.com/davezatz/status/1605351223536021504
    https://twitter.com/davezatz/status/1394250154094510082

    I do have more faith in them long term, as they have another, very successful (charging) business that could subsidize security and quality considerations of their also inexpensive cameras. Time will tell.

  31. Sorry, but the most recent incident falls into the so what big deal category. Some unknown strangers briefly got to see another unknown strangers camera for a bit. Unless someone is stupid enough to put the camera in their bedroom or bathroom is it really such a big deal? I could pay four times as much for the cameras and five times as much for the service and get slightly better security from a different company but it really isn’t worth it to me.

  33. As I wrote above, it’s Wyze’s overarching record that should give folks pause – the most recent privacy incident is the straw the broke the camel’s back for me. Beyond the security considerations, I’ve unintentionally generated a decent amount of Wyze e-waste. My scale had something like an electrical buzzing when I stepped on it that sent it off to recycling, as well a number of bricked contact sensors, and a Wyze v3 with busted microSD slot and stuck IR filter. Had also returned both outdoor cam models due to crap performance. My other Wyze v3 and OG detect rain drops as people, killing the utility of Cam Plus, and they’re currently boxed up. The only piece of Wyze tech I’ve still got in circulation is the stick vacuum.

  34. I used to love my Wyze cameras. One day a couple of years ago the Wyze pan that points to the guinea pig cage started moving on it’s own. I figured someone was peeking so I unplugged it. Haven’t used it since. Then suddenly 2 of the other cameras stopped recording (Wyze v2 and a v3). I switched microSD cards (even bought one directly from Wyze). No luck. The v2 will sometimes randomly decide to record on some days, but the v3 does not record at all. Think I might try Blink unless anyone has other suggestions. Both my cameras are inside but point out the window (front door, back yard).

  36. Wyze is terrible. After being a 7 year or longer Consumer, their firmware updates would no longer allow me to view a live stream( a micro sd card would suddenly no longer format) , pointing me to a subscription. I had to pay for this for a month when I only needed it for a.few days.

  37. I am one of the people who commented that I used the wyze camera to monitor a special needs person who may be in another room from me at times. The person is under 18 and is frequently in states of disrobing. I was absolutely disgusted I had to learn about the issue on Facebook, and not from Wyze, but a Wyze fb group, by a user who was able to see other households online. Wyze never emailed me about it, or said anything for over a week. I have since stopped using Wyze. I’m all set on a company that didn’t feel the need to warn its users and put a child at risk of being seen in their own home environment and potentially exposed to perverts. I can’t believe I paid for a service that put us in that position and never once felt the need to say something. Shame on you wyze. I have been buying and beta testing your products for over 6 years now.

Comments are closed.