WARNING: Kwikset Locks Are Not Secure! :(

[SteveH]

Hello All.

I recently bought a couple MCV to automate my vacation homes. In the future, I also plan on automating other peoples homes and I am learning all that I can.

I will start off with a little butt kissing: MCV tech support is WONDERFUL! I have called them 5 or 6 times. A bad hold time was 1 minute! :-*

Re: locks. For security reasons, I love that I can let people in and out without giving them keys. The MCV notification feature is powerful because when the cleaner enters our home, I know when she started. Or if a service tech arrived to do some work, I can call his cell to ask him questions while he is at the job. After reading peoples posts about the motorized lock (which I love by the way), I picked the Kwikset version over the Schlage.

Now to the security problem. I’ve learned that once someone enters in a MANUAL passcode on the Kwikset (by hitting the black button to program) it cannot be changed or viewed by MVC or any other system. Let’s say that someone is in your home and hits the black button once and punches in the code 13579. 13579 will let them in your home just like having a key. You cannot remove that code electronically. That is because 13579 is now code1 and now there will always be a code1. Tech support said you cannot push buttons to take code1out. What I ended up doing is resetting the lock to factory default (which meant I needed to relearn that lock on MCV). You can override user 1 for instance with another code1 but like I said, there will also be a user1 code in the system.

I called Dennis at Kwikset and he talked later talked with engineering. To my amazement he said no one has every asked them about this. I explained that I’ve had non-Zwave keypads from Schlage in the past and they require someone to enter in a master code to add or subtract anything. IMHO, that is the only way a lock should be designed.

His point was once someone enters your home, that means they would be allowed to change the code (or else why let them in your home). ??? I explained to him that is like saying that you would allow anyone who enters your home the ability to make a copy of your front door key! He disagreed. I explained that the reason for a lock is for “security”. Therefore folks like Schlage (who require pass-codes) understand that security doesn’t mean that just because people are in your home you want to give them an (electronic) key!

Has anyone else thought about this?? Does the new Yale work like the Schlage??

[turkievicz]

I never tought in this way, but is very interesting. I’m very new user of the MCV and, as you, I bought a kiwkset door lock. This is not the best way, but I think that to avoid this you can register the 2 users codes, with this there are no new codes to be registered. The problem is that you will need open remotely the door.

[SteveH]

@DanTDS

I never tought in this way, but is very interesting. I’m very new user of the MCV and, as you, I bought a kiwkset door lock. This is not the best way, but I think that to avoid this you can register the 2 users codes, with this there are no new codes to be registered. The problem is that you will need open remotely the door.

If you manually enter in two codes via the black button, all a person needs to do is override user1 and user2 by punching in their own code. So let’s say the home owner put in user1 code as 1234. Now a renter or cleaner or your Kid’s friend of a friend just hits the black button once (user1) and hits a NEW code 13579 and the lock button. 1234 is now gone and 13579 is the new code. On the deadbolt lock Kwikset version, they don’t even have a screw to stop people from quickly lifting off the cover. So just to make it really easy for someone to re-program it, they put the instructions on the cardboard keypad. Duh!

Let’s use another example: while I trust my teen, IF I wanted to put a notification"Princess entered after 1AM" or “text if the alcohol lock code was entered” someone could quickly enter in a new code without a problem.

According to Kwikset, “no one ever asked this question before”. Therefore I suspect that most buyers never of thought about the lack of security.

If a person puts a * (asterisk) in the code notification section on Vera, then all codes entered will be texted or emailed. But that’s a massive hassle so IMHO to get every text that is ever entered. This a deal breaker for me to ever use a Kwikset.

So in summary if Kwikset’s target market is to include people with homes that they rent out (like me) then it really is a massive security problem.

[markiper]

Interesting, my understanding was that after you register the kwikset lock to your Vera, there 2 internal codes are gone. You are saying that you could still program CODE1 locally without affecting anything on the Vera side and be completely transparent? Have you tried this yourself or you read it somewhere?

I am going to play devil’s advocate here, but do you really thing that the cleaning personnel or the technician repairing something at your place will try to reprogram your door lock? This is a problem with all door locks (automated, and old fashioned ones with keys). The minute that you provide the key or the code for someone to enter your residence, you have a possibility for someone to misuse those items; it really boils down to trust.

The only secure way (this is my personal opinion, and I have kwikset locks on my residence) to allow access to your residence is if you (the owner) open and close the door for the cleaning personnel and/or the technician repairing something. Outside of that, when your keys or your codes are provided to a third person, you should really trust them or you will make your life miserable thinking about all the what ifs … just my $0.02.

[peraevum]

SteveH - I have the Yale deadbolt lock and if manually adding/editing PIN numbers, it requires you to enter the master PIN code first before you can add or edit any user PIN codes. I’ve added new PIN codes this way as well as through Vera (no master PIN needed if logged into Vera).

markiper - I’ll play devil’s advocate to your devil’s advocate. The point is not that a visiting technician won’t be motivated to reprogram your lock. The point is that anyone COULD reprogram your codes if they wanted to. That seems very insecure, and I’d say it takes less of a conscience to just play around with the lock’s buttons than to take a physical key and copy it at a hardware store. One of the benefits of having a z-wave lock vs. conventional lock is that you can deactivate someone’s ability to enter in the future. In theory, a z-wave lock should be give you more peace of mind than a conventional one.

[SteveH]

[quote=“markiper, post:4, topic:169564”]Interesting, my understanding was that after you register the kwikset lock to your Vera, there 2 internal codes are gone. You are saying that you could still program CODE1 locally without affecting anything on the Vera side and be completely transparent? Have you tried this yourself or you read it somewhere?

I am going to play devil’s advocate here, but do you really thing that the cleaning personnel or the technician repairing something at your place will try to reprogram your door lock? This is a problem with all door locks (automated, and old fashioned ones with keys). The minute that you provide the key or the code for someone to enter your residence, you have a possibility for someone to misuse those items; it really boils down to trust.

The only secure way (this is my personal opinion, and I have kwikset locks on my residence) to allow access to your residence is if you (the owner) open and close the door for the cleaning personnel and/or the technician repairing something. Outside of that, when your keys or your codes are provided to a third person, you should really trust them or you will make your life miserable thinking about all the what ifs … just my $0.02.[/quote]
I was on tech support at Black and Decker (Kwikset) and talked with one of the Zwave techs that answers questions. He explained (and I verified) that the manual codes are different than the zwave codes. Dennis had to call me back as he talked with Engineering. He said that you can remove the manual codes by removing the wireless board by the batteries. He was incorrect. My code was only taken out by doing a factory reset.

He also explained (and I verified) that the manual codes are in fact separate from the Zwave.

Here is what I think. Statistically, if I leave my doors unlocked I won’t get robbed. Also, statistically I therefore don’t need a security system. While I am being realistic, statistically my daughter or wife isn’t going to get raped nor will I need to wear seat belts 99.99% of my driving time. Heck, I’ve nver been sued yet I bought an umbrella policy. You see my point.

But if I buy a lock that markets security products, I don’t expect that it should be easy to get an (electronic) key within 7 seconds. Heck, they include the manual on the unit in nice large fonts. :o

I learned that the the other two main vendors see it differently and have codes. Given the choice and knowing what you now know, would you buy the Yale or Kwikset?? I know my answer.

But getting back to the probabilities. I rent my vacation homes out by the week. Not many people would feel comfortable with a manual inside of the compartment showing how to re-program the lock within 7 seconds. IMHO, I’m not being paranoid.

[mysticjay]

@SteveH - Maybe i’m not understanding what you’re saying - but it’s not making any sense to me. Why would anyone hit the program button to start with? Is the program button not on the inside of the lock???

If you’ve a guest that unscrews the lock from inside and then programs a code - then perhaps you’d better off not inviting “that” guest???

I've learned that once someone enters in a MANUAL passcode on the Kwikset (by hitting the black button to program) it cannot be changed or viewed by MVC or any other system.

I don’t know what kind of kwikset locks you’re using - being a quick set lock user I can assure you , that is not the case with kwikset or Vera!!! I’m almost certian you’re not sure how to set the pass codes through Vera. 8)

[sparkejj]

@SteveH,

Point about being able to make changes to the lock without entering a master code is clear.

What is not clear to me, is the separation of manual codes versus Z-Wave codes. AFAIK, when you have the Z-Wave version of the lock, it can hold 30 codes. They can be programmed and deleted through Vera. Additionally, the first 2 codes can be programmed manually.

If you program a code manually and then include the lock into Vera’s network, that code will show up in Vera (i.e. Vera will show a code is assigned). You could then delete and add a new one with Vera.

Also, if you program a code manually, Vera picks up on it instantly (but it does not seem there is an event defined that can be used in a scene / notification?).

So it appears you do have control over the manual codes with Vera. Doesn’t prevent anyone from reprogramming the lock, like you said, but it seems it can be detected. Possible workarounds may include scheduling the real codes to be invalid for say 5 minutes a day, i.e. forcing them to be re-activated by Vera every day? Or maybe through the [tt]Advanced[/tt] tab or Luup, re-writing them based on an event (e.g. 2 hours after cleaners came in).

In my case (i.e. primary residence) I have my own code and the wife’s code in spot 1 and 2. So we would quickly notice when someone overrode those codes with a new one.

[SteveH]

[quote=“mysticjay, post:7, topic:169564”]@SteveH - Maybe i’m not understanding what you’re saying - but it’s not making any sense to me. Why would anyone hit the program button to start with? Is the program button not on the inside of the lock???

If you’ve a guest that unscrews the lock from inside and then programs a code - then perhaps you’d better off not inviting “that” guest???

I've learned that once someone enters in a MANUAL passcode on the Kwikset (by hitting the black button to program) it cannot be changed or viewed by MVC or any other system.

I don’t know what kind of kwikset locks you’re using - being a quick set lock user I can assure you , that is not the case with kwikset or Vera!!! I’m almost certian you’re not sure how to set the pass codes through Vera. 8)[/quote]

Jay. You are not understanding what I am saying. There are two ways to program your Kwikset. 1). Vera via Zwave and 2). via the black program button when you lift up the battery cover. For the handle version of the Kwickset, there is a screw holding down the cover. For the smaller deadbolt version, there is no screw to hold down the cover.

I would never want a person to have the ability to program in a code at the unit. But according to Kwikset engineering, I cannot disable that option. Once a code is manually entered, the exclusive way to remove that code is by resetting the lock back to the factory settings.

So the reality is anybody who lifts up the battery cover can push the black button once or twice (per the printed instructions behind the battery cover) and punch in a code followed by hitting the lock button. They now have an electronic key to your home. I can program that inside of 5 seconds!

[SteveH]

[quote=“oTi@, post:8, topic:169564”]@SteveH,

Point about being able to make changes to the lock without entering a master code is clear.

What is not clear to me, is the separation of manual codes versus Z-Wave codes. AFAIK, when you have the Z-Wave version of the lock, it can hold 30 codes. They can be programmed and deleted through Vera. Additionally, the first 2 codes can be programmed manually.

If you program a code manually and then include the lock into Vera’s network, that code will show up in Vera (i.e. Vera will show a code is assigned). You could then delete and add a new one with Vera.

Also, if you program a code manually, Vera picks up on it instantly (but it does not seem there is an event defined that can be used in a scene / notification?).

So it appears you do have control over the manual codes with Vera. Doesn’t prevent anyone from reprogramming the lock, like you said, but it seems it can be detected. Possible workarounds may include scheduling the real codes to be invalid for say 5 minutes a day, i.e. forcing them to be re-activated by Vera every day? Or maybe through the [tt]Advanced[/tt] tab or Luup, re-writing them based on an event (e.g. 2 hours after cleaners came in).

In my case (i.e. primary residence) I have my own code and the wife’s code in spot 1 and 2. So we would quickly notice when someone overrode those codes with a new one.[/quote]

Double check your work. I could not get Vera to detect anything when I programmed (and re-programmed) user1 and user2 at the Kwikset keypad. I was on the phone with Vera as well as Kwikset. I called them both to see how I could control the non-secure user1 and user2. The bottom line is I can come to your home and program user1 or user2 and you won’t ever know that I did.

[sparkejj]

What exact model Kwikset are you talking about?

[frankflorida]

Steve, thanks for the Eyeopened discovery.
As a property manager and store owner I bought 4 Kwikset Locks so far and planed to install them at a few duzend rental homes. Now I have to re-think… and the 4 exsisting looks… need to find an idea how to lock the locks from being opened from the inside… pretty crazy… I got multiple break ins WITHOUT any door damages, lost serveral flat screens, laptops, PCs, all break ins are police reported and now I get the idea of how they did this…! IF that was the trick… it cost me 11 grand!!! Maybe I should take an attorney and have checked if Kwickset has failed in pointing out that the lock is not for usage in public buildings or any other homes than your very private home. Any person can set them self a secret hidden code… that is soo crazy! Kwikset need to upgrade their firmware in the locks ASAP! In ZWave they should have a check-box to “deactivate manual program button”… or at least create an EVENT "manuall program button pressed and a warning message!!

[SteveH]

@oTi@

What exact model Kwikset are you talking about?

Kwikset only sells two Zwave models (handle and deadbolt) and in three finishes. The electronics are identical in the 6 permutations. Therefore your Kwiskset Zwave works the same way. :o

I bought two of each (handle and deadbolt version) and all 4 units that I bought do this. I called in disbelief figuring no “security” product could be this dumb. When I continued to push the issue that it was a poor design and they needed a fix, Dennis at Kwikset said “if someone is in your home we assume they are trusted”. I then asked if he would like to hand out electronic keys to everyone who enters his home without him being aware of it. I then educated him on how the competition Schlage does it. Now I learned that Yale is smart enough to have a passcode to change anything at the unit. Well OF COURSE they would and should.

Dennis said “I am the 1st person who has ever thought of this”. When I called MCV to see if I could remove the codes remotely, when I told them what Kwikset said: MCV also said “I am the 1st person to ask this of their team”. Therefore I figured I should educate or warn other MCV users. It seems that Yale has the best of the best solutions because they have motorized deadbolts, are passcode protected and can be re-keyed to the other two brands. No, I don’t work for Yale or any other manufacturer. If enough people complain to Kwikset, maybe they can implement a deactivate option for programming that black button. It could be as crude as having me cut a wire so that a renter of mine in my vacation home cannot simply lift a plastic battery cover and see quick clear instructions of how to re-enter later. Like I said, give me 5 seconds and I can get in your home later.

The thing that really frustrated me as well is once a black button local code is entered, they don’t have a solution to remove it either. Schlage for instance allows you to take out a code. So if I wanted my rental manager to make sure no code were entered by a keypad sequence, I could not do that. He would have to enter in codes to override them. At the end of the day, it’s NOT a security product.

[sparkejj]

@SteveH

Kwikset only sells two Zwave models (handle and deadbolt) and in three finishes.

There is a contemporary deadbolt now.

The electronics are identical in the 6 permutations.

The Z-Wave boards look the same, but is the firmware the same?

Therefore [i]your [/i]Kwiskset Zwave works the same way. :o

Well, if your lock works one way, and mine a different way, there must be a difference somewhere?

• Programmed 4 codes with Vera; code in position 3 is called ‘Slot 3’, in position 4 ‘Slot 4’.

• Deleted code 1 and code 2 with Vera, so now only have code 3 and code 4, code 1 and code 2 are empty.

• Hit [tt]Program[/tt] button on lock once, to manually program code 1. Trace:
  [font=courier][size=8pt]24 … ZWaveNode::HandlePollUpdate_User_Code_Report node 24 device 181 USER_CODE_REPORT 1=1 <0x803>
  06 … Device_Variable::m_szValue_set device: 181 service: urn:micasaverde-com:serviceId:DoorLock1 variable: ^[[35;1mPinCodes^[[0m was: <VERSION=2>1,0; 2,0; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; now: <VERSION=2>1,1,****,Code 1; 2,0; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; #hooks: 0 upnp: 0 v:0xbe01c0/NONE duplicate:0 <0x803>[/size]
  [/font]

• Hit [tt]Program[/tt] button on lock twice, to manually program code 2. Trace:[font=courier][size=8pt]
  24 … ZWaveNode::HandlePollUpdate_User_Code_Report node 24 device 181 USER_CODE_REPORT 2=1 <0x803>
  06 … Device_Variable::m_szValue_set device: 181 service: urn:micasaverde-com:serviceId:DoorLock1 variable: ^[[35;1mPinCodes^[[0m was: <VERSION=2>1,1,,Code 1; 2,0; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; now: <VERSION=2>1,1,,Code 1; 2,1,****,Code 2; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; #hooks: 0 upnp: 0 v:0xbe01c0/NONE duplicate:0 <0x803>
  [/size][/font]

• Delete code 2 on Vera. Trace:[font=courier][size=8pt]
  24 … ZWaveNode::HandlePollUpdate_User_Code_Report node 24 device 181 USER_CODE_REPORT 2=0 <0x803>
  06 … Device_Variable::m_szValue_set device: 181 service: urn:micasaverde-com:serviceId:DoorLock1 variable: ^[[35;1mPinCodes^[[0m was: <VERSION=2>1,1,,Code 1; [b]2,1,,Code 2[/b]; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; now: <VERSION=2>1,1,,Code 1; 2,0; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,****,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; #hooks: 0 upnp: 0 v:0xbe01c0/NONE duplicate:0 <0x803>
  [/size][/font]

[jirahhome]

[quote author=SteveH link=topic=8423.msg53799#msg53799 date=1321476745]

@markiper

Here is what I think. Statistically, if I leave my doors unlocked I won’t get robbed. Also, statistically I therefore don’t need a security system. While I am being realistic, statistically my daughter or wife isn’t going to get raped nor will I need to wear seat belts 99.99% of my driving time. Heck, I’ve nver been sued yet I bought an umbrella policy. You see my point.

Statistically speaking, the best security is multiple layers of security, so to say that just because your door is locked you dont need a security system is inaccurate (you still have windows that can be opened if not broken). I do agree that Kwikset should have a better code mechanism, but I will also remind you that no lock is foolproof. I have a Kwikset at my home, and what I did was add event triggers. if my front door opens, picture in a picture pops up on all the tvs and shows my front door cameras (i have one on the outside and one on the inside of the door). If this happens during a predetermined and set time (say while the house should be empty) my wife and I get texts/emails and all my cameras begin recording. If neither of us respond to that email in 10 mins, my alarm notifies the police station and sends video footage is emailed to us. I know this does not directly address your issue of the code set, but I would again remind you that no single security measure is foolproof. I would suggest having Vera resend the codes you choose every night at say 3am as a backup measure.

[pgrover516]

I gotta go with SteveH on this one, just poor implementation by quickset, ability to program anything on a lock without a master code should never be, period

[SteveH]

[quote author=jirahhome link=topic=8423.msg53970#msg53970 date=1321730156]

@SteveH

[quote=“markiper, post:4, topic:169564”]Here is what I think. Statistically, if I leave my doors unlocked I won’t get robbed. Also, statistically I therefore don’t need a security system. While I am being realistic, statistically my daughter or wife isn’t going to get raped nor will I need to wear seat belts 99.99% of my driving time. Heck, I’ve nver been sued yet I bought an umbrella policy. You see my point.

Statistically speaking, the best security is multiple layers of security, so to say that just because your door is locked you dont need a security system is inaccurate (you still have windows that can be opened if not broken). I do agree that Kwikset should have a better code mechanism, but I will also remind you that no lock is foolproof. I have a Kwikset at my home, and what I did was add event triggers. if my front door opens, picture in a picture pops up on all the tvs and shows my front door cameras (i have one on the outside and one on the inside of the door). If this happens during a predetermined and set time (say while the house should be empty) my wife and I get texts/emails and all my cameras begin recording. If neither of us respond to that email in 10 mins, my alarm notifies the police station and sends video footage is emailed to us. I know this does not directly address your issue of the code set, but I would again remind you that no single security measure is foolproof. I would suggest having Vera resend the codes you choose every night at say 3am as a backup measure.[/quote]

We agree that more layers of security are better. It seems you missed my point about law suits, rapes, etc, etc. I realize I am going to have to run into someone who would want to enter in a code. But in your example, how will that help me when my family isn’t at the house and hours away? Like many 2nd and 3rd home owners, I am relying on rental managers to figure out if a cleaner, renter or service person re-entered a code. Heck, a 1 month renter may really like the idea of entering the code “11” to get in and out quickly. I don’t want a 11 code on my door. Would you?

Of course nothing is fool proof. That goes without saying. But I don’t think I am asking a lot of a “security product” manufacture to prevent someone from entering an electronic key inside of 5 seconds. As I stated a few times before, they put the instructions right on the unit.

[SteveH]

@oTi@

[quote=“SteveH, post:13, topic:169564”]Kwikset only sells two Zwave models (handle and deadbolt) and in three finishes.

There is a contemporary deadbolt now.

The electronics are identical in the 6 permutations.

The Z-Wave boards look the same, but is the firmware the same?

Therefore [i]your [/i]Kwiskset Zwave works the same way. :o

Well, if your lock works one way, and mine a different way, there must be a difference somewhere?

• Programmed 4 codes with Vera; code in position 3 is called ‘Slot 3’, in position 4 ‘Slot 4’.

• Deleted code 1 and code 2 with Vera, so now only have code 3 and code 4, code 1 and code 2 are empty.

• Hit [tt]Program[/tt] button on lock once, to manually program code 1. Trace:
  [font=courier][size=8pt]24 … ZWaveNode::HandlePollUpdate_User_Code_Report node 24 device 181 USER_CODE_REPORT 1=1 <0x803>
  06 … Device_Variable::m_szValue_set device: 181 service: urn:micasaverde-com:serviceId:DoorLock1 variable: ^[[35;1mPinCodes^[[0m was: <VERSION=2>1,0; 2,0; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; now: <VERSION=2>1,1,****,Code 1; 2,0; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; #hooks: 0 upnp: 0 v:0xbe01c0/NONE duplicate:0 <0x803>[/size]
  [/font]

• Hit [tt]Program[/tt] button on lock twice, to manually program code 2. Trace:[font=courier][size=8pt]
  24 … ZWaveNode::HandlePollUpdate_User_Code_Report node 24 device 181 USER_CODE_REPORT 2=1 <0x803>
  06 … Device_Variable::m_szValue_set device: 181 service: urn:micasaverde-com:serviceId:DoorLock1 variable: ^[[35;1mPinCodes^[[0m was: <VERSION=2>1,1,,Code 1; 2,0; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; now: <VERSION=2>1,1,,Code 1; 2,1,****,Code 2; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; #hooks: 0 upnp: 0 v:0xbe01c0/NONE duplicate:0 <0x803>
  [/size][/font]

• Delete code 2 on Vera. Trace:[font=courier][size=8pt]
  24 … ZWaveNode::HandlePollUpdate_User_Code_Report node 24 device 181 USER_CODE_REPORT 2=0 <0x803>
  06 … Device_Variable::m_szValue_set device: 181 service: urn:micasaverde-com:serviceId:DoorLock1 variable: ^[[35;1mPinCodes^[[0m was: <VERSION=2>1,1,,Code 1; [b]2,1,,Code 2[/b]; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; now: <VERSION=2>1,1,,Code 1; 2,0; 3,2,,Slot3; 4,2,****,Slot4; 5,0; 6,0; 7,0; 8,0; 9,0; 10,0; 11,0; 12,0; 13,0; 14,0; 15,0; 16,0; 17,0; 18,0; 19,0; 20,0; 21,0; 22,0; 23,0; 24,0; 25,0; 26,0; 27,0; 28,0; 29,0; 30,0; #hooks: 0 upnp: 0 v:0xbe01c0/NONE duplicate:0 <0x803>
  [/size][/font][/quote]

I would be surprised if the firmware would allow different control. I suppose anything is possible but it’s much more likely that you know something that both tech support teams do not.

As I said before, MCV and Kwikset tech support said I could not remove the manual codes by Vera. In fact, the Kwikset tech had to call me back after he talked with engineering. His answer was the same after talking to engineering; the only way to remove a manual code once it was programmed was to pull the zwave board or do a complete re-set. He was wrong on his point of removing the Zwave board but he was correct on the complete reset so he isn’t batting 1000.

Now on my unit, if I program a manual code I cannot see it pop up in the U14 GUI just by looking at the other named codes. Does yours show up? I am a newbie so I will look deeper. But I strongly predict you are onto something and I am delighted if I can figure out if someone has changed it. That really will be good enough for me in combination with blacking out the clearly written directions on how to re-enter a code manually.

I won’t be at either one of my places for a few weeks or more. It seems that you have electronically changed and removed slot 1 and slot 2 with Vera. Could you go over and re-try unlocking the door with the manual codes? I want to make sure it’s is not still inside of the lock; just being paranoid. I do know this: If I enter slot 1 or slot 2 codes and the door manually, the unlock action will initiate my event timer (I put a * in for the code). I appreciate you digging in this one because I think you might have found an acceptable workaround. ;D

[garrettwp]

I can confirm with oTi@ that the codes can be removed from Vera when programmed from the lock. I have done this numerous times.

• Garrett

[sparkejj]

Was able to get a (Prowl) notification as soon as a manual code is entered on the lock, through a quick hack that adds an event that triggers on any update to [tt]PinCodes[/tt].

Filed bug# 1958 to get support for a ‘PIN code changed’ event.