You are misinformed. Authenticator apps have been on the Knowledge Article for a very long time as I have been using an Authenticator app for a majority of my time with an account. In fact Authenticator apps have been compatible with Wyze 2FA since May 2020 with the 2.10 app release.
If you have proof that Wyze is monitizing the data they are compiling by selling it rather than using it internally to study customer and usage trends, please feel free to present that evidence. Wyze collecting data from contract partners who collect and compile it for them does not in any way prove they are selling it. Correlation does not prove causation.
Every inquiry to Wyze about this has been answered with the same answer: Wyze does not sell user data collected.
Do you just enjoy arguing? I never said they sold the dataâŚI said they mined the data. I thought the email mentioned needing to use SMS, but I just read it again and it does mention that an authentication app can also be used. The problem I have with your posts is you just keep arguing because you use 2FA and have âno issuesâ. Honestly, who cares? That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that many users have very valid reasons to not want to use it for their Wyze account. Have you asked yourself the question âWhy have so many Wyze account had their credentials compromised?â? I haveâŚand the answer is likely âbecause Wyze doesnât require password requirements that make them more difficult to crack.â Wyze could also implement a 3 strike rule that locks the account and requires a password reset from account holder after 3 failed login attempts. Iâve given you plenty of examples so please stop arguing and accept the fact that not everyone agrees with your stance on this.
I could ask the same. And with that I will agree to disagree with some of your positions and perspectives while I wait to allow Wyze the time to develop the features more completely. Have a relaxing Holiday Weekend.
Rome wasnât built in a day. This is still a quite fluid development.
With all due respect, the announcement and any pending implementation could have been held off until everything was fully developed and ready, including the ability to totally opt-out and/or use an email address for this. All of the angst and user concerns could have been avoided. Wyze should not have announced anything or done anything until it was ready to turn on MFA that included opt-out and email. This was an unforced error. You should not announce anything about Rome being built until Rome is actually built and fully tested.
You mean running around like a chicken with itâs head cut off looks a little untechnical. Itâs not like hundreds of companies havenât rolled out 2FA in the last 10-15 years. It couldnât have been too hard to evaluate their 2FA feature set.
I didnât get the popup because I have already been using 2FA and I havenât seen a screenshot of what that looks like, but I thought I read of some who either cancelled the pop-up or got around it without activating the feature.
Voluntary 2FA has been in the app for years. This new mandatory requirement hasnât yet had a lot of time to breathe so I canât be sure how the UI reacts when the popup is presented.
I got the same email⌠however I already packed all my Wyze cameras in a box. Moved on to Eufy and wonât be looking back. The changes they have continued to make since these cameras came onto the market are in stark contrast to the business model they started with.
With 100% support I agree with you. Another user described it as the Fire. Aim. Ready. principle.
That speaks to how it was done, and not why it is being done.
Announcing the situation and need in socials, getting feedback, developing user friendly features and options, then beta testing it before rollout with a set future implementation date would have been my preference. But, how can the toothpaste be shoved back into the tube now? Perhaps by pulling it back and regrouping with a unified plan.
My comment was more about giving them reaction time from all the instantaneous feedback. They now have to step in front of this train to stop it or change directions rather than being able to steer it where it needs to go and that is a situation Wyze brought about.
My wild guess is that Wyze would also like to purge any extraneous and/or spurious accounts.
We want everyone to engage with 2FA at least once before they opt-out.
By this process, we hope to improve your individual security (explicit) AND the general security of our entire platform (implicit.)
To be clear, the above is an extension of my wild guess, not anything Wyze has said.
I hate to tell you this but requiring so-called âstrongâ passwords does absolutely nothing to reduce the problem of credentials being compromised.
Requiring strong passwords actually makes compromise more likely because it further encourages people to use the same password for multiple sites.
The compromised credential problem that Wyse says they are trying to fix has nothing to do with anyone cracking individual passwords â the problem they describe is entirely about âotherâ sites with supposedly less security where hackers have been able to retrieve lists of usernames and passwords for the other site then go around randomly trying that same combination hoping to find somewhere else that one of those people used the same name and password.
In the first place, worrying about that is total nonsense, unless Wyse has administrators who use the same name and password on other sites! There is no harm to Wyse or to anyone else if you or I let our password be compromised.
2FA is just another of those feel good responses to a Karen screaming âYou-Need-To-Do-Somethingâ situation that doesnât really have any worthwhile solutions.
Requiring strong passwords actually makes compromise more likely because it further encourages people to use the same password for multiple sites.
Nope.
The proper solution is for people to use different strong and unique passwords on different multiple sites. And the way to do that is to use a password manager,
If you are using good security already, MFA does nothing but add friction and user irritation. If a strong and unique password is hacked from one site, it cannot be used anywhere else. The justification for the existence of MFA thus evaporates.
Additionally, providing a personal cell number to be used for MFA just exposes another piece of critical personal information to be stolen should that database be cracked.
Am I giving my cell number out willy nilly for this nonsense? Am I fooling with yet another (authenticator) app?
Wait, is that really what the new FAQ entry says?! Thatâs ludicrous. Go through all the pain and exposure of enrolling into MFA just for the privilege of being able to turn it off again?
What kind of opt out is that?
Edit: Not the FAQ wording, but a logical interpretation thereof; thanks Slab.
@WyzeDave it really comes off that Wyze is hostile to its customers.
Okay, thanks, so it was peepâs extrapolation of the new FAQ. Though not much of a leap - as written it says everyone must enable 2FA and that an opt out will be available later. I just skimmed the FAQ and this seems like a red flag for a sizable number of people:
