Multiple Users' Permissions for Shared Users


Privileges are NEEDED when sharing cameras out. I want to share to family but not give them the privs, ability, to turn the camera off, delete events. Allowing wide open privs is a huge security, privacy issue. I have revoked sharing from family due to this. They turn the camera off, they delete events on their own.



To recent commenters here, Wyze has made it clear that they don’t care about their customers. An executive made a noncommittal, excuse filled answer during an AMA but @WyzeJasonJ has recently made it clear that the core functionality issue isn’t going to be fixed anytime soon. To summarize the recent comments, Wyze designed this poorly initially and isn’t willing to put forth the sizable effort to fix it. Anything you hear to the contrary is nothing but talk to placate you. THEY DON’T CARE. Instead they’ll put their time and resources behind creating new routers, headphones and who knows what else. They have the money, they have the resources, they just don’t care enough about their users to task them with fixing this issue.

It’s unfortunate but playing nice and expecting to be respected as a buyer, isn’t going to work. The only way to get this done is if we collectively trash the company and make it known the disrespect that they have towards us. This isn’t an issue that you consider when you buy a smart device but this lack of core functionality cripples all of their devices. Make it known to prospective buyers. Steps to take:

-Dispute the purchase with your credit card company since core functions don’t work as described due to this

  • Give Wyze a bad Google review
  • Give bad reviews for the products themselves.
  • Unsubscribe from all of their paid services
  • Give your feedback to reviews on YouTube etc.
  • The companies email format is, lookup some executives names and email them personally

This wishlist item was updated to In Progress / Researching, so it sounds like they are planning to offer some of this now.

If you can provide me a link to said descriptions or any Wyze source where they describe currently offering multiple users’ permissions for shared users, I would like to be able to point that out to them in their next AMA or Fireside event as I have done so multiple times in the past for people, including the most recent one. I’d appreciate that, it would be a helpful reference. Thanks.

1 Like

On 3/17, @WyzeJasonJ said “The main complication is in the way the app was originally written, to make a lot of these fixes easy we need to rewrite the app and do not have the resources for a full rewrite currently.” That’s a pretty clear way of stating it’s not happening anytime soon. Honestly, I appreciate that answer much more than the wishy-washy AMA answer. If you don’t care enough about a concern your customers are expressing to fix it, at least be upfront and make it that clear. And no, I don’t blame any of this on @WyzeJasonJ. It’s unfortunate that he’s the one stuck dealing with the pushback while the executives that are keeping it from being fixed are fully isolated from it.

This lack of functionality impacts many basic user experiences and expectations. For example, it’s fully reasonable for me to expect to be able to share a home security camera with my wife and for her to be able to access the SD recordings. It’s also reasonable for businesses, etc. to expect to be able to share limited access to a security camera with employees. These issues also impact the differing notification preferences of multiple users in a household. Lastly, this causes problems for the various Wyze devices that have phone-based geo-location features. I’m not sure what is and isn’t spelled out online. It’s difficult to find documentation about the nuances of how things like this work for any smart home ecosystem until you’ve already made the purchase. That’s likely why Wyze is ignoring it. It’s not hurting sales because future customers don’t know what they don’t know. You can easily compare camera megapixels across companies but comparing how user accounts and sharing permissions work isn’t so easy.

Here’s a link to the description of the geo-location feature on their thermostat. No, it doesn’t say that it will work for both a husband and wife’s phone. It doesn’t say it won’t either though.


Good comment. The Wyze app is due for a pretty good overhaul, update. But sadly this is common. The Nest app is very lacking in today’s world for functionality too for example. There is no reason there isn’t shared permissions available or a dark mode for the app in 2023.

“Sharing” is just intrinsic to some devices. Each member of a family is not going to use a personal, dedicated, unique bathroom scale, for instance. Mom and Dad don’t have separate thermostats. On the other hand, the fitness band is personal. Then some devices may be either – like these cameras.

Wyze treats the cameras like fitness bands. One device links to one phone for one user. You wouldn’t pass the wrist band back and forth, would you? You don’t add your wife’s step count to your own – or worse, add your own weight to your wife’s!

So the only workaround, in Wyze’s design, is for each user to have a unique account on a unique phone linked to a unique camera. And if you have two users who both want to view the front porch, you need two cameras. Two doorbells. Maybe two “base stations” if the outdoor cam is needed.

Or so it seems. I do wonder how the basic fundamental design of the Wyze Bathroom scales allows “sharing” and how come features of scales and thermostats and vaccuums and smart switches and all the other devices intended from the get-go to be shared can’t inform a sharing feature for camera.


There is a company: Withings. They make smart health devices. They make smart scales and you can have different profiles and keep that data private between my wife and I. Yes, different log in on your Withings app, but using the same smart scale.

But I get what you’re saying. Wyze almost needs to create a “Family” profile then share out the camera per say Parent or child privs(Privileges).

1 Like

This feature request has been sitting at researching since 2018. I believe the reason is Wyze is all but forcing a subscription model going forward and allowing this cuts into that revenue. It’s the only explanation for why others can see the events in the cloud but not on the local device. I’m surprised the official answer isn’t’sign up for cam plus. The issue with cam plus, solved by the sd card is over 2weeks stored and continuously recording.

Shared users long ago were able to access many of the features. Users complained because they did not want shared users to have that much control. So we switched the other direction. We are researching what we can fix without doing a full app rewrite because we do not currently have the resources for that. The way the current app is written makes some things hard to do. We had started on the planning for the rewrite and we had to change course.

We do know there are many things that were planned for the rewrite that we are trying to do now the best we can in the current app because they have been asked about for a long time (dark mode and others).


Thank you for the reply. I would like the shared users (not owner) to not be able to turn cameras off and not have rights to delete Events. Just those 2 items removed would be great.

Thank you,


I think that is all what many (not all) of us want… To share viewing access with no control… Truth be told if you are giving someone that much access to control you are most likely just going to share with them your account login. That is what me and my wife do…

Sure there are others that would like to allow limited control but I think majority of all users would be happy with just viewing access.


I have said the same thing, and while I used to do that with my wife, I do have to point out that it is not a realistic option for people who have the scale, watch, band, etc. There are lots of products that require everyone to have their own separate account because of the individual, personal health data that is totally unique to each account. Those people have a legitimate need to be able to share more control options with their spouse while maintaining a separate account.

It can also make it more difficult to maintain good security with 2FA as Wyze wants everyone to do. Not that it can’t be done. I synced my Authenticator App codes onto my wife’s phone, so she can access them that way, and I listed her phone number as a secondary SMS number as well. My wife does sometimes switch back and forth between my account and her account depending on her needs at the time.

But mostly, it seems reasonable that customers with a scale, band, watch, etc shouldn’t be punished just for having more Wyze products than others, and that is how it feels to many of them as they are forced to use separate accounts, but not able to both have [convenient] full access to the other household devices. That is a big reason I support this wishlist, for those people who need it, even if it isn’t a HUGE deal for me personally.

And that is just related to cameras. there are some other devices I might want to share with my daughter, to let her have SOME access, but not full control. For example, I might want to let her be able to arm/disarm the alarm system when she leaves or arrives home, but I don’t want her to be able to manipulate the settings and schedules and such. She could take a certain sensor out of the arming status so when the alarm system arms, that sensor doesn’t trigger it. Then she could sneak someone in or out without me knowing because she wouldn’t even have to disarm the system (that’s just a hypothetical example, I’m not saying that is happening or there aren’t parenting consideration in such a case)…I’m just explaining I don’t want a teenager having full control over my HMS settings. Some thing goes for several other non-camera devices. Or maybe allowing a baby-sitter to have limited access to some things during certain periods, etc.

I am glad Wyze is looking into some other options. I look forward to any improvements, but like you pointed out, there are some workarounds for now, and I do share my account with my wife, but she does have to do some things on her separate account too. It would just be nice for her to not have to switch back and forth.


Hey y’all, the app should probably never have been released in the first place it wasn’t ready for prime time playing when they pulled it out and it certainly isn’t ready for it now but it’s been a long time. Just say you don’t have the resources I don’t think is true I think you don’t have a new software release designed there are lots of programs out there that manage smart home stuff cameras switches whatever.

Remember, you’re operating in 2023 not 1963, get the application up-to-date get it streamlined get it affective don’t worry about getting every bug out because you never will But you can certainly improve on the application its design its appearance everything is so dated…

I’m sorry, but that is just excuses. Wyze isn’t putting the resources into updating the app. Period. Wyze is putting resources in to releasing other products instead. I don’t care about a smart scale in this topic. Those are separate privacy issues when dealing with people’s health. This is about updating the app to offer privs, privileges of permissions to users. Make me Admin/Parent privs, and then offer Child/guest privs. Those child/guest privs are view only.

Again with all due respect I see many of the moderators here or “forum mavens” making excuses for Wyze. Or offering long labours solutions that simply do not work in the real world for those of us that want our devices to just work without getting a background in IT Administration (that is my background).

I say all this with positive intentions.


Go look at the new ROKU camera offering.
Look familiar?

The ROKU app is just a neutered version of the Wyze app. They found the resources to reskin the Wyse app for ROKU but could not find any resources to fix the security deficiencies.

All the provided work arounds involve sharing credentials, a violation of security best practices. I have abandoned these cameras to my wife for her use monitoring our goats during kidding season. The moment two different people log in using the same credentials you are no longer authenticating people, you are validating an account. All activity is logged as the ACCOUNT, not me, not my wife.

Not. The. Same. Thing.

What everyone here is asking for is a basic requirement for any network attached device these days, AuthN/AuthZ with RBAC. Authenticate the person performing the activity, authorize their access to features and functions, log that activity. Wyze built an Old School Apple IOS app which, back in the day, had no concept of a multi-user system. If you were logged into the iPhone/iPad you were considered a trusted user and were allowed access to everything.

Apple moved on but Wyze did not.

I am looking for a replacement camera system that actually performs authentication and authorization.

btw, Don’t even think about getting the ROKU system, your Wyze cameras will not work with it and the ROKU cameras will not work with your legacy Wyze system.

Blowing smoke up your customer’s skirts will not make this issue go away, please address the lack of adequate security and lack of progress. “We don’t have the resources” doesn’t cut it when you continue to release new product managed using the same decrepit management software. You found the resources to partner with ROKU, talk to them about the security issues.

Have a very nice day.

1 Like

I believe there is a misunderstanding. When I started my post by saying “I have said the same thing” I meant that in the PAST (not anymore), I once thought sharing the same account could work, but I do not believe that is a reasonable solution anymore.

I have been advocating for this wishlist to be implemented for at least 3 years. In the above post, I was attempting to courteously explain to another user why this wishlist cannot be resolved simply by sharing the same account with a spouse. I agree with your stance that laborious workarounds are not desirable solutions and that this wishlist is still necessary, I also gave examples of how I need different permissions for my wife vs for my daughter.

Thus, my ending statement about how I am glad Wyze is now working on this wishlist item so we will have other options besides being forced to share an account. They have updated this wishlist item to “In Progress.”

Again, if any of my wording gave a different understanding, then I apologize for the poor choice of words. I have also been wanting multiple permissions for at least 3 years, and I will also continue to advocate and push for this and help explain to other users why this is important and why people can’t just “share an account” as a good solution for everyone, because as I explained above, that is not a good solution for everyone.

I hope that helps clarify. Sorry for any previous misunderstanding.


Appreciate the reply. :slight_smile:

1 Like

This item is not currently “Being worked on”. It is still in “Researching”. It has not been tagged as “In Progress.”
Check here - About the In Progress category

That’s a fair enough point and clarification to make.
To explain my semantics here, I consider “researching” as part of in progress since that is also what Wyze calls it and is the name of the category the wish has been nested under as seen in the thread header:

To me, anything that is not “maybe later” or “probably not” is a sort of “working on it” since even researching means they are actually paying an employee or team or employees money to try to find a solution that can be implemented. So people are indeed doing work, and being paid to “work” to try to improve the request.

But mostly I say that because having previously worked as a professional QA Tester for both software and hardware, sometimes when we said “researching” it meant a whole lot more than just reading or talking things out. We would actively test and try things, create new code, change products around and test again, devise new plans, retry new things, and all of this was still considered “researching” even though we were technically actively “working on” them, including both physically and with software. We didn’t necessarily call it “in development” because our various ideas and potential proposals were not yet officially approved or agreed on. There were often several branches of options, and until one was decided and agreed on, it was not yet necessarily in “development” even though it still a form of “in progress.”

So for Wyze wishlist, the main categories are:
Wishes Granted, Probably Not, Maybe Later, and In Progress.

Each of those has several subcategories. For In Progress, there are the following:

  • Researching
    • This may mean more than “reading/discussing” as it often did with other companies I did work with; but I don’t work for Wyze, and am not involved in the process, so I can’t really say…but it certainly means more is being done than “Maybe later” or “Probably not”
  • Development
    • I suspect this means they’ve found and decided on a good solution that they are reasonably sure they can implement and that some employees or teams are tasked with getting it done (maybe not exclusively, depending on what else is also on their task list)
  • Testing
    • There are multiple forms of testing. This could mean they have a functional solution, but it is still in internal testing to work out the bugs or user experience. It could mean that it is in limited user testing involving NDA’s, etc. It could mean they are allowing a few select users who indicated a strong need to test it and get feedback. It could mean that it is in a widespread alpha testing. It could mean that it is in public beta testing. In some cases, it could potentially mean it is in slow-release testing, A/B testing or cluster testing. There are a lot of options and Wyze has used a lot of them depending on what their needs are with the feature or product in question.

It is a good point that there are even things that make it into testing that are then canceled and not implemented due to various considerations, both app-features and hardware. So I don’t mean to imply that just because this wishlist has been added to “in progress” and researching and that wyze is paying employees to find a good solution for this, that we’re for sure getting it. I cannot know any of that. I definitely don’t work for Wyze. I only meant to say that I am glad this wish is not still labeled under “Maybe later” with nobody actively considering it anytime in the reasonable future. I will take “In progress” and “researching” over “maybe later” any time. That’s all I was really saying. I am glad Wyze has apparently agreed that this is important enough to be on the list of things they will approve to pay employees to figure out sooner, rather than “maybe later.” :+1:


From a developers stance, I don’t see the huge difficulty with this task unless they hard-coded a lot of the code-base of things (which is what I suspect considering they are saying they would need to do a whole rewrite in many posts), but that’s just my two cents. As you’ve said, we don’t work for wyze and we don’t know exactly how they work, we’re just people who enjoy wyze products and look forward to the improvements they are looking into. They could let the main owner have access to a page on the app that has a bunch of true/false’s of whether they want certain members specific access to features, making them disabled/enabled or visible/invisible. Let me know your thoughts from a QA perspective please.

1 Like