From Consumer_Action_Taskforce
This article needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues.
This notice will be removed once sufficient documentation has been added to establish the systemic nature of these issues. Once you believe the article is ready to have its notice removed, visit the discord and post to the #appeals channel.
Learn more ▼
This Article Requires Additional Verification
This article has been flagged due to verification concerns. While the topic might have merit, the claims presented lack citations that live up to our standards, or rely on sources that are questionable or unverifiable by our standards. Articles must meet the Moderator Guidelines and Mission statement; factual accuracy and systemic relevance are required for inclusion here!
Why This Article Is In Question
Articles in this wiki are required to:
- Provide verifiable & credible evidence to substantiate claims.
- Avoid relying on anecdotal, unsourced, or suspicious citations that lack legitimacy.
- Make sure that all claims are backed by reliable documentation or reporting from reputable sources.
Examples of issues that trigger this notice:
- A topic that heavily relies on forum posts, personal blogs, or other unverifiable sources.
- Unsupported claims with no evidence or citations to back them up.
- Citations to disreputable sources, like non-expert blogs or sites known for spreading misinformation.
How You Can Improve This Article
To address verification concerns:
- Replace or supplement weak citations with credible, verifiable sources.
- Make sure that claims are backed by reputable reporting or independent documentation.
- Provide additional evidence to demonstrate systemic relevance and factual accuracy. For example:
- Avoid: Claims based entirely on personal anecdotes or hearsay without supporting documentation.
- Include: Corporate policies, internal communications, receipts, repair logs, verifiable video evidence, or credible investigative reports.
If you believe this notice has been placed in error, or once the article has been updated to address these concerns, please visit the #appeals channel on our Discord server: Join here.
Guardzilla is security camera company gone out of business.
Controversies
Security vulnerabilities
Guardzilla security cameras had critical security vulnerabilities. Researchers found that the cameras were transmitting unencrypted video feeds, making it easy for hackers to intercept and view the footage. Additionally, the cameras' firmware had hardcoded credentials, which could be exploited to gain unauthorized access.[1]
Server shutdown
Guardzilla's camera software needed an active connection to a cloud-based server that is now shut down. This situation is one of the examples why it's important to provide options to self-host devices. Products that rely on cloud services should have mechanisms that allow users to run the product locally if the cloud service becomes unavailable. This way, users are not only able to retain control of their devices but also ensure that the product remains useful even if the company stops offering its services.[2][3]
References
