We are a preschool, we are just noticing that the cameras are getting red when nobody is on the app, no sensor at all, and we tried different movements, it didn’t turn red.
The thing is now that we are investigating, if it sees someone in the front watching it, it would turn back blue as fast as we watch…showing intelligence..
I m aware of children being in demand for dark organizations….
We are changing our cameras, Wyze is being hacked or does it knows who is watching? Are they affiliated?
We are lied to, and observed….I hope all of you will wakeup!
1 Like
It’s likely the cloud service uploading video for AI analysis if you have CamPlus…
However if you want a truly self-contained camera that doesn’t use a cloud service Reolink and others will work for you and be far more secure.
Before dave27 spouts off, Reolink has never been in the news about security issues like Wyze has been multiple times…
Wyze is definitely not a Safe camera in your usage case.
5 Likes
Um, the Illuminati that are after her kids most certainly have access to Reolink also.
6 Likes
Seriously, takes a 5 second google search to confirm they have. Either you’re just making stuff up or outright lying.
2 Likes
You got me, that’s why I still run Wyze cams too…
I like being a participant in the illuminati reality shows 
Your search was faulty, post an actual News article link they were hacked.
Yes anything can be hacked but with proper setup and a secure network they cannot be hacked without Local access to the network or a compromised network. If your network is compromised then everything connected is fair game.
Post up those Reolink security related news articles Skippy, Good Luck
1 Like
The following link explains the Status light colors:
https://support.wyze.com/hc/en-us/articles/360052539432-Understanding-your-Wyze-Cam-v3-Status-Light
Being red does not mean someone is watching, it could also mean that an event is being recorded. Since you probably have them in an area that sees movement a lot, you can expect the light to be red.
If you are really concerned, you could change your password and make sure that you have two-factor enabled. If you are still concerned about this, you can reach out to Security@wyze.com
4 Likes
Welcome to the Forum, @liligenevieve! 
I don’t see any mention of a red status light in the Quick Start Guides for Cam v1 or Cam v2 (which you used to tag your topic), but the Help Center article about Cam v3’s status light indicates that a solid red light can indicate that the camera is…
I wonder if that’s what you’re experiencing, because this is what I’ve experienced with other Wyze Cam models. If you can provide more details about which cameras you’re using, their settings, and the timing of the light conditions that you’re seeing, then other community members might be able to provide additional helpful feedback.
For instance, @spamoni did as I was typing my response! 
Yeah, exactly, and it’s one of the reasons I just turn the status lights off.
Winnah! It’s like @bryonhu has read my long posts in the past or something. 
2 Likes
I do as well. 
2 Likes
One more thing to be mindful of is a camera could be viewed WithOut the status light turning red.
BTW, all of my Wyze cameras are facing outward from my house.
3 Likes
If they have FULL camera access wouldn’t they just turn off the status light 
I have my status lights turned off for security reasons.
The status LED lets anyone know if they have power.
In my case with large system wide battery backup I don’t want to show if the power has ran out if on backup power.
3 Likes
They could. In my case I have my Status lights off. My daughter has a v3 at her apartment and I notice it turning from blue to red. If her v3 no longer had a Status light I would ask her why?
One small explanation to add is that the reason why you are seeing the status light go on and off repeatedly and thinking that somebody stops watching when you investigate, is what is actually happening is if you don’t have a subscription, then the camera is subject to what is called a 5 minute cool down period. So it will record an event for a few seconds, then turn the light off for at least 5 minutes before it will turn the light back on. This is what is making you think that somebody is watching and then stops and then watching again when it’s just the event recording happening intermittently. If somebody was actually watching the light would probably stay on for a lot longer without 5-minute cool Downs.
That is one cool thing about Reolink is that this is possible. However, most people don’t actually set it up that way. They want to be able to stream remotely and so they use Reolink’s built in P2P system which is reliant on Reolink’s infrastructure. So, for the majority of people, the above statement is kind of misleading. However, a lot of really techy people can do it themselves to be completely self-contained using port forwarding and ddns. But there are a lot of risks with doing port forwarding. Lots of people get that wrong. Personal configuration of port forwarding can be an even bigger risk than using another company for remote streaming as far as the majority of people are concerned. It’s one of the most exploited security vulnerabilities by hackers to gain access to people’s networks. People like @bryonhu are capable enough to do it themselves, but I absolutely don’t recommend that for 99% of regular consumers who don’t have networking skills or advanced routers and knowledge of how to configure things securely.
2 Likes
And that is why they should have a professional grade security camera system installed by a professional if they have such worries…
3 Likes
It’s possible it is recording an event but with the event cool down it turns off for the cooldown period. Check the event tabs to see if that’s what it is doing. That being said I just made a post, the light is very inaccurate. Often when viewing in the app it’s blue for me but turns red when I actually close the app! You can also view it live from the web access portal or on an Alexa device and it never turns red! I am more paranoid that somebody may be watching, and it indicates that nobody is!
This one is on the first page, along with many discussions on reddit and reolink forums regarding the P2P cleartext password being vulnerable
The wyze one you’re referring to I’m assuming is when some people saw still images of others cams for an hour or two last year. They shut down access and fixed it, it wasn’t a security hole in the firmware that can be exploited.
Any cloud or internet connected cam is vulnerable. This is why they should be on an isolated network and why you never have them viewing “private” areas.
I think OP is one of those ones that has some “issues”, I don’t think it is any sort of breach or that the lights are even doing what they claim. The statement about children being valuable assets or whatever, and the cameras having intelligence, well that sort of calls into question the sanity factor.
1 Like
You might regret soliciting that --I don’t usually attack Wyze’s competitors, because I even use and like many of them and I think they are GREAT options for other people looking for something that fits their different preferences. I have also previously stated that I have looked through lots of Reolink forums, etc and I see a lot of the same complaints there that I see people make about Wyze too. But they absolutely suit some people’s preferences better. I totally support that they are a better fit for you. 
But let’s limit confirmation bias and selective wishful thinking for a minute and realize that Reolink is still just another [smart] IP camera. Reolink has had LOTS of vulnerabilities and issues too. More than Wyze.
First to address the Wyze security concerns…even most of the past concerns about Wyze cameras security weren’t real examples of cameras being actively “Hacked.” For example, the CVE’s they had a couple years ago were clear that 1) They could only happen if someone was given access to your local network (which I think doesn’t really matter) and 2) nobody ever exploited it before it was patched. And it was too complicated for 99.99% of people to understand, let alone execute. But none of it mattered since you (you plural as in most of us, not talking to anyone in particular here, just the “general” indirect you) presumably don’t give randos access to your home router, and they needed that to do anything else anyway.
But since you asked for examples about a history of Reolink camera vulnerabilities:
Reliable Source: Tomsguide Smart Gadget Security Is Terrible and Only Getting Worse | Tom's Guide
Alex “Jay” Balan of Bitdefender showed RSA attendees that four different cheap Chinese security cameras sold under the Geenker, Keekoon, Reolink and Tenvis names had terrible security. Most could be accessed over the internet via Telnet, the 1970s network protocol with no encryption. Anyone with mid-level coding skills could dial into the cameras from anywhere and watch you at home.
Another reliable source: PC Mag
How about a list of 14 separate HIGH RISK vulnerabilities all found in Reolink in 2021 and 2002: Vulnerability Spotlight: WiFi-connected security camera could be manipulated to spy on communications, among other malicious actions
I mean, 14 in just those 2 years alone!!! I think Wyze has had something like 6 total CVE’s related to them in their entire history of existing, and Reolink had more than double that just in 2021-2022, which indicates Reolink is way less secure and worse than Wyze if we’re going based on actual vulnerabilities found and published by white hat hackers. Wyze appears to be doing WAY, WAY better than Reolink in terms of safety and security.
But wait! We’re not done yet…
How about this random BLOGGER who announced they had found a command line injection vulnerability in Reolink because Reolink was incompetent again as they explained:
The vulnerability exists because user supplied data is handled insecurely in the Camera Name attribute.
Then there is the report for CISA here: Reolink P2P Cameras | CISA I personally don’t hold this one against Reolink though because it’s basically the same as all of Wyze’s CVE’s that were limited to people who had access to the local network as stated:
An attacker with local network access can obtain a fixed cryptography key which may allow for further compromise of Reolink P2P cameras outside of local network access.
CVE-2020-25173 has been assigned to this vulnerability. A CVSS v3 base score of 7.7 has been calculated.
In addition, they are 100% owned and controlled by a Chinese company which is subject to the CCP. Nobody would even know if the CCP forced them to create a backdoor in their firmware and app on behalf of the government. However, the benefit is that they do allow your camera to keep working if you shut off all internet access. You could run them on a CC router that has no connection to the internet. That’s a huge benefit, but you wouldn’t be able to access it remotely that way.
I could probably find some more if you really want me to dig though, but we’ve already uncovered WAY more vulnerabilities and such than Wyze has ever had, and almost all of them were more severe.
Again, I don’t hate Reolink. I love them. I think they are expensive, but they make AWESOME options. I am even on the lookout for them to have a good price offer someday so I can justify getting one to try it out and see if I want their PoE model as a primary redundancy option for a critical zone. Their history of bad security doesn’t scare me off. I’m just saying, let’s be careful about claims of them being “SAFER” than Wyze, etc when their history of constant CVE’s demonstrates otherwise while Wyze’s history of CVE’s has been relatively limited by comparison. 
I respect Reolink, but let’s not put them on pedestal they don’t deserve. What they do deserve is praise for the ability to work without internet (though few people use them this way), and allowing RTSP and PoE options. Those are awesome reasons to recommend them. Just be real about their strengths, and limited CVEs is not one of their strengths. 
It’s totally understandable if someone chooses Wyze or Reolink or Eufy or Ring or Arlo or whatever they prefer. I think competition is good for every consumer. We don’t need to tell people the others all suck. There are reasons I prefer Wyze as my primary and reasons others prefer others. We can all be friends. 
I like lots of the other companies too, just not enough to be my primary or favorite company even if I use them for special use-cases or redundancy.
And I mean…you did ASK
Also, lets be fair, NO CAMERA anywhere is really safe and secure. Nothing is entirely foolproof. Nothing. To prove the point, researchers recently demonstrated that ANY camera, including local-only cameras, cell phone cameras, basically anything with a camera lens, can be viewed by a neighbor or car across the street using an antenna and watching the electromagnetic wave changes between the lens and the circuit board before it’s ever even encrypted (then they can reconstruct images and data). Anyone can do this with $2K worth of equipment to ANY camera even if it is closed circuit and Power over Ethernet with no internet access. Reolink is no more safe from this “vulnerability” than anyone else. This is why you don’t put ANY CAMERAS, including “local only” cameras in privacy sensitive areas. [Including both Reolink and Wyze]. Assume that ANY camera can be seen by someone else, because it definitely can be. You do things to reduce that risk and issue, but there is no “SAFE ALTERNATIVE” that is 100% privacy guaranteed unless you get rid of all cameras, including from your laptop and cellphone.
2 Likes
Those vulnerabilities were patched long ago before I started using Reolink cameras.
Good to know though
In the last few years it seems there hasn’t been issues.
Besides my router is setup securely too…
They are no more or less immune than Wyze. Doesn’t matter how secure your router is, if the cams connect to an external server or are exposed to the internet for remote viewing, they’re vulnerable. The only secure system is a closed circuit one that you need to use a VPN to access when you are away from home. That applies to all brands.
Your tune certainly changed a lot - Skippy.