Not this outage, but the previous one that coincided with a firmware update, and restarting of the cameras.
Same drama, forums on fire, etc…
Finally gets fixed. I turn off auto update on anything I can, and ignore every update going forward. The cameras work, I am not fixing them.
I do not disagree firmware updates are usually important, however usually a firmware update has been tested thoroughly as they are notorious for bricking things across the board.
As with ANY company I will wait for them to either release a firmware update with a feature that I want, or, an important security update before I pull the trigger, Also I will wait a minimum of a month, unless the update is critical, and watch the forums or other areas for complaints,
This worked in my favor this time (knock on my wooden head), as all of the cameras I had left at the previous firmware, were unaffected by this recent outage.
YMMV with this approach as sometimes not all notes are included in what went into said update. Usually for a security reason,
It’s not always advisable. You’re assuming that the server component remains the same. Wyze continually updates that component and there are times the client (the app) component and firmware have to be in sync or else it wouldn’t work right.
I have left my cameras on older firmware so that I can use wz_mini_hacks on them. They continue to work to my satisfaction without becoming unreliable. I don’t think the security updates are worth the drama caused by cameras breaking as a result of the new firmware. My cameras are behind a firewall and mostly outside.
The cams being behind a firewall in this case actually means very little as they are online cams.
Holding off on updates for as long as possible will normally be fine with caveats, which is mostly that of security, where even a single day can make all the difference between compromised and not compromised.
I think WYZE has done well enough on their own allowing compromises, and has been less than transparent about it over the years, Some would say almost to the point of negligent, Not my department. Anyways, Yes you are right.
A home firewall is great but if there is a tunnel already created by a compromise then a firewall is useless in that instance. I am however a little confused as I did not mention a firewall in my post.
That firewall isn’t a factor in this case, because the network link is initiated from the inside of your LAN by the Wyze app. Sure you can also block that, but you would be blocking essential app functions, too.
I believe that communication with the Wyze servers is encrypted. Someone would need to attack those servers to gain access and then what? View my driveway cameras?
Encrypted app communication with Wyze doesn’t affect the someone’s ability to hack into Wyze’ servers. Maybe you mean Wyze storage servers are encrypted? I have no idea about that, but at any rate your firewall has no effect in that area.
My firewall prevents someone from accessing my cameras (and every other device on my home network) from the internet. The security issues Wyze has been chasing, for the most part, require access to the cameras and not the servers. If you cannot get on my local intranet you won’t be able to access my cameras.
As I indicated in my original response, this isn’t true, if any entity in your LAN has initially initiated the connection. That’s how a firewall works in this case.
