depends. the keypad is portable as i understand it. i doubt many cover every access point with a switch nor every interior space with a motion sensor. even if you did, what stops an intruder from beaking through a screened window or not operating the window frame or door? further, it’s a rather simple strategy to bring your own magnets and fool sensors with them. this could make the keypad accessible upon an uninvited entry while in home mode. these are things that you would normally not encounter, but we are talking about security systems after all and you can’t always know what the circumstances will be when you need it most. were i wyze (and i’m not claiming to be, i assure you), i would require a code to change the state of any level of an “armed” state as i’m guessing their lawyers have advised. i do not have a wyze alarm, but am commenting on a lot of experience with traditional systems.
i see. thanks. check my reply post below for more information. i would appreciate your input.
Really? The bottom line is we used to have an option. Now we don’t. I’m ok with taking a reasonable “chance” in your far-fetched hypotheticals for the convenience of going from home to disarmed.
Please make a PIN being required to enter Disarm Mode from the keypad an option, not a default setting. This recent update is just another annoyance with this system that makes me regret making the switch to Wyze.
Enough already.
If someone breaks in, setting off the alarm, he can’t disarm without knowing the PIN. This is a good thing.
IF I AM ALREADY INSIDE WITH NO ALARMS TRIGGERED, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO DISARM WITHOUT ENTERING A PIN.
Since yesterday, there’s no audible confirmation when I use the app to switch modes. The app also doesn’t disarm - although it indicates that it did - unless I go to the keypad and enter my PIN.
Everything is up to date on my end. Fix this thing or give us a way to revert to an earlier build that worked properly.
Strangely, I noticed a couple of oddities in my HMS today.
For starters, I still have the option to disable to the PIN requirement… but the only thing it changes when enabled is that I have to enter a PIN just to ARM the system. If I then disable it again, I still have to enter a PIN to disarm HOME, even with no active trigger. The option seems bugged.
In an unrelated issue, I have noticed that the volume is DRASTICALLY quieter. If I hit the LOW setting, I actually have to hold the hub to my ear to hear it. If I set it to HIGH, I can barely hear it more than 10 feet away. Not sure if there is an active topic related to this issue, but I did not find one on initial check.
UPDATE: found the topic here: Sensor hub volume has decreased considerably after latest update
Put it back the way it was. If the system is Armed Home. I shouldn’t have to put in my code to go take out the trash.
what if they enter via an unprotected window or defeat the sensor with a magnet?
This is just silly. We can play the “what if game” all day long. What if aliens deploy an EMP and disable everything??? 
This is why motion sensors are available. Just let it go. The pin when nothing has been triggered is a non-risk factor if you have everything set up correctly.
I’d prefer to have the choice to manage my own safety - not some attorney sitting in Seattle playing the same game you are.
My house is on Piers 5 feet in the air. Ain’t no one coming in through a window unless they bring a ladder. It’s lot easier to enter the house across the street on a ground floor window. and not have to haul and fool with a ladder.
i understand you believe it is silly, but having installed alarms for a living and answered them when they were triggered for 37 years as a municipal officer, i can tell you they had and continue to have serious vulnerabilities that need to be understood. obviously, wyze has received legal advice which is similarly aware of these vulnerabilities and has suggested or demanded the operational change. do you understand the simple operation of a magnetic reed switch? a PIR motion sensor? radio frequency signal transmission? maybe it’s good that you don’t or you may not feel so secure with your alarm system and realize a simple inconvenience like entering a code to change the state of readiness isn’t actually much of an inconvenience at all. in closing, i would remind you that many people are victimized by people with which they once shared a close relationship. you paid your money, you want security, i’d push the buttons.
You may have valid points but it should definitely be an option & not the default.
What I understand is the irrelevance of this minutia in terms of mitigating potential vulnerabilities in any safety system. None. Zero. Zilch are foolproof. Not a single one is void of vulnerabilities. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool, I believe we can both agree on that.
For me - the vulnerabilities that you reference are inconsequential. Can it happen? Of course. For my satisfaction. And, frankly, as it relates to my security system - that’s all that counts, I see absolutely no need for entering a pin if no alarm has been triggered when in “Home” mode.
I mean. Let’s be honest about it - if someone manages to bypass the triggers WHEN IN HOME MODE, as you suggest, and makes it into my house. How is the net result going to any different whether the system is technically armed or not? They are in the house at that point. Undetected. The alarm is useless at that point.
It’s a silly unnecessary hoop with absolutely no benefit whatsoever.
Yes we understand magnets and motion sensors. Please stop beating this dead horse.
Its clear that all Alarm systems are a DETERRANT ONLY. We all know that. Your professional opinion as a former law enforcement officer and an alarm tech is valued. I believe the majority of users on this thread and in the community like the way the system was before the update.
This whole pin situation is getting a bit ridiculous. I noticed over the past couple of days that even when I disable the alarm in the app, I still have to enter the pin to disarm it! I stood at my front door for a few moments after disarming in the app and was prompted to enter my pin. I realized this is the 3rd time it’s happened and it’s frustrating smh.
while i agree with all that as i have said before i believe this is a legal issue rather than a user security/convenience issue for wyze. i would also reiterate that many vulnerabilities are minor, until they happen.
So if Wyze changed this because of legal reasons, then put that in the release notes of the update. Also change the help information that is in the application that still says it works the old way. The fact that both these things are not reflected in the new behavior makes me believe this is simply a bug that they didn’t catch in QA testing for the latest release and Wyze support are not closing to chime in to this thread (if they even read it) and tell us so. Has anyone submitted an actual bug report or feature request and gotten an answer? If so, what was the response?.
I agree it was an easier process before, however the easier you make an alarm system, the more security you are giving up.
I have had many professional alarm systems in the past and none of them let me disarm the system (home or away mode) with out my code). so
did I like it the way it used to work? yes,
do I think it a little more secure in certain situations? yes
do I still want the option to have it back the way it worked before? yes.
My most recent system was Vivint & I never entered a pin to switch from Armed Home to Disarmed. I used that system for about 6 years & this was never an issue.
I don’t doubt that, but vivint is just one manufacturer. the idea that being able to disarm a system from any state of “armed” is obviously a potential security risk. the argument, i think you’ll agree, is simply if you or i are willing to live with the security risk or want to close the security gap as tight as it can reasonably be closed. i have seen people hide inside the secured perimeter and emerge at a more opportune time. it depends on the motivation of the criminal. were i a female living alone, i would put up with the inconvenience to close this gap. i understand you may not wish to. but my thought as far as wyze is concerned is that it cost them little to just program it to require the code and help protect them from possible lawsuits from users who may experience an incident in which this was a factor. i have a system from a major manufacturer (DSC) that requires a coded input to change any state. i simply stand on the side of closing the loophole for an acceptable bit of no-cost inconvenience. it’s all about getting as close as possible to 100% peace of mind without going bust in the process.