The "not intended for security" argument is getting old

Its getting really annoying when these half baked people that have nothing better to do than hangout on a forum all day, try to use the “not intended for security” argument every time someone mentions that is what they wanted to do with the devices.

When you sell a product(s) like Wyze does, people are going to purchases them for the intent that a large majority of the similar products out there are sold to do. No everyone is going to pay $25 for a camera, and just watch their dog all day long. No people are going to use them to keep watch of their home, and in the event that something criminal happens, hope that the product they bought, that is a camera advertised that it works, that it will record 24/7 if there is an mSD Card, that will send a notification if it detects motion, will do just those things… While those things are “security” related, they are the basic functions the camera is advertise to do, but failed a majority of the time at doing so.

Same goes for the Sensors; its a contact and motion sensor. You expect that if the contact sensor is tripped that you will get notified, thus why people put them on the doors to ensure if the door is opened either while no one is home, or everyone is suppose to be sleeping, or if you’re teenager is trying to sneak out of the house… and yet the simple contact sensor FAILS to do that, especially when its being reported as “OFFLINE” all the time, even though its less than 2 feet from the Bridge. And people are putting up the motion sensors to trigger lights (possibly porch lights to warn off a possible intruder) yet the sensors fail to detect motion, and lights are not being triggered as they are expected to be (especially when they are Wyzes own branded bulbs)

So while Wyze may not advertise the products directly as “security” devices… They certainly do advertise the products to do things, and have the functions, that could be used in a manor to provide security, which they often fail to do.

Please come up with a better argument as to why these products are failing for so many people,… and for those that like to reply “they work perfectly fine for me, you must be doing something wrong” is even worse of an argument, because its entirely not possible just because you have no issues, then no one else should be, otherwise its the users fault, and can’t possibly be a faulty product, poor coding, and poor design (by the company Wyze rebranded their products)


If the majority have no issues then it is highly unlikely to be a design fault or coding fault
The exception to that would be if you are using a phone from 4+ years ago then they probably haven’t tested compatibility, hardware decoder issue on old Android versions as an example

True people can have faulty hardware but it good to test other possibilities first & when someone says that they have multiple cameras and they all have the same fault that is extremely unlikely which points to it being a fault with something else

Most people’s issues seem to be with their router but say that the camera should be plug & play and don’t want to change anything else (settings or hardware)


well worded sir. many people fail to realize the impact environmental factors can have on electronics. I would say that the “error/failure” rate of Wyze products is roughly what would be expected considering the millions of items sold and the hundreds of issues brought here. many of which are fairly easily diagnosed and solved.

my only question would be to the people that rely on Wyze as “security devices” why would you buy a product expressly labeled against your intended use and become frustrated when it fails for that use and if security is that important, wouldn’t you want to spend more money to assure yourself you get something for that intended use that is guaranteed to work?

you wouldn’t spend 25K$ on a ford mustang and expect the performance of a 250k$ Lamborghini… even though the basic function is the same, they are meant for different paths. :upside_down_face:


Except it’s not “labeled” as not being a security camera, there isn’t a single thing printed on the packages that say “not intended for home security” … in fact Home Depot sells it in the home monitoring section of their stores… along with the Ring, blink and other similar devices.

And your logic in comparing those two vehicles is based on ignorance; each vehicle is sold at a value based on name, set performance is listed for each one of them. And you get the advertised performance from the respective vehicle. Your talking price, I spoke of function.

And whether it said “for security” or not, the point was the device fail for so many people for doing simple things like “monitoring” a area of the home.

And there are certainly more issues brought forth than just in the “hundreds.”

1 Like

And yet I’m using an iPhone XS Max, iPad Pro (3rd) and and iPhone X… doubt those are the reasons for the failed notifications I get notifications from every other app on my devices or why the 12 cameras I have often show as offline, and need to be rebooted at least 2 weeks, or why the 5 sensors I have show offline randomly, until I reboot the camera the bridge is connected too, even though the camera is online. Or why the contact sensors show open, when they are clearly closed, or why the motion sensor will trigger when a cat walks past, but not an adult, or why the Wyze bulbs often disconnect for the network (yet nothing else in the house has long connection)… so let’s move onto the router… nearly everything in my home is hardwired; from the desktop/Mac in the rooms, to the smart TVs, to the server stack in the basement, to the xboxes, and the Nintendo Switch. The only thing we have wireless in the home, are tablets, phones, and Echo devices, ring doorbell and couple odd ball things (Not to include the smart bulbs, and Wyze Cams) … our entire house was ran off of Phillip hue bulbs, and TB-Link bulbs, and we never had issues with them losing connection to the network/hub, yet the 4 Wyze Bulbs do. Our ring doorbell came (Battery powered) doesn’t drop connection, nor do we need to reset it ever. Our mobiles/tablets don’t drop connection… so router isn’t the issue; and furthermore the router used is just set with basic settings; I don’t allow it to control any sort of QoA or priorities any device over another; it’s also a mesh network, so there is coverage in the entire house… no camera is left without a good connection status.

Let’s come up with some better excuses next time for the Wyze products being poorly designed (Well copied) poorly coded, features poorly thought out and ever worse customer service (taking over 2 weeks to get a response from anyone that’s not going to just send you a copy/paste scripted email response


The people on this forum are not ‘half baked’ people who have nothing better to do. They are people who try to help with minor issues.
The ‘security’ argument is not an excuse for why they don’t work. It is just a reminder that they are not nearby for security use. While you are right the box does not say that, the TOS you agreed to does. Still people will use them how they see fit and if they do not work as advertised, then yes, that is an issue.
I can imagine you are frustrated as it seems you nay have contacted support and not had a good experience there either. While there is not a lot I can do, I can try to get a WYZE employee to follow up and see what they can do to help.


Personally, I think the biggest issue with security is the 5 minute cool down between alerts and cloud recorded clips. This combined with the short clip length of 12 seconds are the biggest problems to security.

Connectivity issues often seem to come down to network configuration and hardware. Either range, congestion, or the environment interrupting signals.

1 Like

For a $25 camera the v2 seems to work okay for me. The v2 has some quirks that are annoying, like white text on a light background. Sometime the camera doesn’t see me as a person but it sees a person occasionally if the brightness of the screen changes. Luckily for me, connectivity is not an issue and there is minimal activity at my house, if the neighbor’s cat stays out of my yard.

I think I will hold off with the three v2 cams I purchased. I cannot see buying any of the other devices for some time. The other devices seem to be too troublesome. Camera troubleshooting is not my hobby.

You get what you pay for but I think all in all, the v2 beats this adage to some extent. I am not sure about the other devices measuring up.

I think I will come back in a year to check up on progress. Some things need a little more cooking.

I have also read this “not for security” disclaimer many times on this forum.
If one reads the Terms of Service (section 3) carefully they will see what Wyze is emphasizing is that they do not provide a security service such as notifying emergency services, but they do provide notifications that it is up to the user to react to.

NOTIFICATIONS SENT THROUGH THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY – THEY ARE NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A MONITORED EMERGENCY-NOTIFICATION SYSTEM. You are solely responsible for responding to any applicable messages, alerts, signals or notifications provided or transmitted in or through the Products or Services, including the responsibility for contacting any authorities in connection with any of the foregoing.


The following quote is from the first line of 3c.

No Life Safety, Security or Critical Uses of the Products and Services


That is all I ever remind people, that they sr not ‘intended’ to be used as security. The reason I point that out is because I am trying to help them with issues and I want then to know because not many read the TOS. I have never told anyone they can’t use it for security and I have never used that as an excuse of why they may not work. I have even said if they do not work as advertised there is an issue.


I think the problem here, and I could be wrong, is that people constantly say that this won’t work and should be fixed because I use it for security. WYZE will not change their stance as this would make them liable in the case of a product failure during the worst possible time.

The Mavens and others ( I included) then remind everyone that that is not the intended use. It is a monitoring device!.. they cannot then be held liable for the failure as there is no guaranteed up-time.

Those whom choose to use it as a security system do so at their own risk.

This does not mean that Wyze will not attempt to fix any issues/bugs related to the product as that would be bad business. However, crying my home and family are at risk… is the risk that you have placed upon YOURSELF by choice.

To have that risk lessened… Get a professional monitoring company install a certified security system and pay to have them monitor it!!!

I am sorry to say, buying any camera and monitoring it yourself is not the answer to security.


Good response @Ex70s


Marshall, have you ever taken the time to read the fine print of most wifi cameras? Here’s what Nest says about their wifi equipment (I have a Nest Hello and 2 Nest Protects). I think it’s standard boiler plate Lawyer CYO lingo.

Reliability of Services. You acknowledge that the Services, including remote access and mobile notifications, are not error-free or 100% reliable and 100% available. Proper functioning of the Services relies and is dependent on, among other things, the transmission of data through your wi-fi network, enabled wireless device (such as a phone or tablet) and broadband internet access, or optional Cellular Backup service, for which neither Nest nor any wireless or data carrier is responsible, and may be interrupted, delayed, refused, or otherwise limited for a variety of reasons, including insufficient coverage, power outages, termination of service and access, environmental conditions, interference, non-payment of applicable fees and charges, unavailability of radio frequency channels, system capacity, upgrades, repairs or relocations, and priority access by emergency responders in the event of a disaster or emergency (collectively, “Service Interruptions”). You understand that Service Interruptions may result in the Services being unreliable or unavailable for the duration of the Service Interruption. We cannot and do not guarantee that you will receive notifications within any given time, or at all. YOU AGREE THAT YOU WILL NOT RELY ON THE SERVICES FOR ANY LIFE SAFETY OR CRITICAL PURPOSES. MOBILE NOTIFICATIONS REGARDING THE STATUS AND ALARMS ON YOUR NEST PRODUCTS ARE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY

So, yeah, Wyze, Nest and everyone else is saying if you choose to use their products in life-threatening or security purposes, you are going out on a limb. It’s not a cop-out … it’s what lawyers demand company say in this ligtigious society.


And, just for grins … here’s RING’s user agreement. Hmmm, are you starting to see a pattern here?


You acknowledge that our Ring Products and Services are not intended for a third-party monitored emergency notification system and that we do not monitor emergency notifications and will not dispatch emergency authorities to your home in the event of an emergency. Ring makes no warranty or representation that use of the Products or Services will affect or increase any level of safety. You acknowledge that the Products and Services are not intended to be 100% reliable and are not a substitute for a third-party monitored emergency notification system. We cannot and do not guarantee that you will receive notifications in any given timeframe or at all. All life threatening, safety and emergency events should be directed to the appropriate response services.

I could go on, but you get the point.


Ok, I’m curious now. Here’s ARLO’s disclaimer on its SMART security 911 monitoring:

Limitations on Arlo Smart Service. The Arlo Smart e911 Service will not function (1) with the loss of critical electrical power, including without limitation the loss of power to equipment necessary to route Arlo Smart communications to the appropriate emergency call center; (2) if the wireless or broadband internet connection to your device with the Arlo Smart application is not operational; (3) at a remote location with no internet connection; (4) if the Arlo Smart application is not correctly configured; (5) if the correct physical address for the Arlo e911 Service is not provided; (6) if an emergency call center’s technical limitations render it incapable of receiving or processing calls from Arlo e911 Service; and (7) other force majeure events cause the quality of the broadband connection to deteriorate, including without limitation network congestion. Your acceptance of these Arlo Smart Service Terms constitutes your acknowledgement that Arlo has advised you of these potential limitations.

Disclaimer of Liability. We do not have any control over whether, or the manner in which, calls using our Arlo Smart e911 Service are answered or addressed by any local emergency response center. We disclaim all responsibility for the conduct of local emergency response centers and the national emergency calling center. We rely on third parties to assist us in routing Arlo Smart e911 Service communications to local emergency response centers and to a national emergency calling center. We disclaim any and all liability or responsibility in the event such third party data used to route communications is incorrect or yields an erroneous result. Neither Arlo nor its officers or employees may be held liable for any claim, damage, or loss, and you hereby waive any and all such claims or causes of action, arising from or relating to our Arlo Service unless such claims or causes of action arose from our gross negligence or willful misconduct.

1 Like

We’re sorry to hear that you’ve been having these difficulties with our products. While we do not intend them for security use, we all (including the company) have an expectation of promised features functioning and you bring up a solid point.

We are working on improving our support and apologize for being behind and the impact that it had on you. Do you still have an open support ticket that you would like for me to look at?


I believe that most people who order this product know that they are not receiving a full service security system. But it seems to me that a product that offers motion detection alerts, night vision, smoke alarm and CO detection alerts, people identification, and 12 second video captures triggered by motion is definitely intended for security purposes.
Perhaps it would be helpful if you could explain then what Wyze’s intentions are for use of it’s products.


That actually is the biggest reason I would argue against security, after the 12-second clip you have 5 minutes you will not be notified of anything.
I do not work for WYZE so I will not say what their intended use is but I have seen the called smart devices, To me that means to make things easier in your house, turn on/off lights or other items based on motion or opening items.
Then again, I could be wrong.


While it’s possible that we may open up to more of a security direction later, at this point it’s just for general monitoring or “keeping an eye on things” and making a more convenient lifestyle. I agree with Jason that the 5 minute cooldown between alerts would be a major flag for me using these products for security. We understand why people use them for security purposes but it is not the intent.


So what is the point of the 12 second video which is saved to the cloud good for if not security? Also the 5 minute lag time is backed up with a mini-SD card.
I would like to mention that while I find this “is/is-not a security card” argument a bit confusing I own 2 cameras and 2 sensor kits plus 4 Wyze bulbs and, outside of being a bit buggy at times, I enjoy having them.