I just purchased a Qolsys IQ Panel 2 Plus from Surety and have paired a few Z-wave devices, including 2 Schlage Connect BE469 locks. I can control the door locks properly from Alarm.com, but I don’t see the expected Access Control / Access Points controls in the Users section that allows me to specify an access code
for the locks
. I have both locks configured for an Access Code length of 8.
On the ADC web site, I can only see users’ Access Codes
for the panel
(so, 4 digits long only). Some of these codes are listed in gray and some are red, though I’m not certain what exactly this distinction is signifying.
I’m comparing this with another ADC account that I have (from a different provider), where the fields and layout look a bit different and there is an Access Control | Access Points section at the bottom with both Panel Access and All Lock icons, and an 8-digit Access Code field below. This also has some Scheduling controls, which appear to be missing from my Surety account.
Interestingly, while my existing accounts with the other provider are properly using 8-digit codes, if I create a new test account (which I did to grab screenshots for comparison), it is now only allowing me to enter 4 digits here, too!
I tried factory resetting one of the locks, rejoining and then reconfiguring for 8 digit codes, but still no difference. I tried this primarily to see if there could be some mix-up in codes I programmed before having joined the Z-wave network (before I got the panel). Pre-existing “local” codes were wiped out of both door locks, which I imagine is expected.
First 2 screenshots are from my Surety account, and the third is from the other provider… Given that a new user created on ADC from my other provider similarly prevents more than 4 digits, I wonder if this is some generic issue with ADC? Any thoughts on what is going on??
Typically, For locks that support user codes longer than four digits, the first four digits apply to the security panel (if they are given Panel Access) and the full code applies to the lock. Have you tried entering all 8 digits in the field?
However, it appears that lock access has not fully completed. To troubleshoot, you’ll want to remove the lock from the Z-Wave network and re-pair the locks one at a time. Be sure to leave the lock within 6 feet of the panel for about ten minutes after programming to ensure secure enrollment.
Once done you will want to run a Z-Wave network rediscovery once all Z-wave devices are in their final install points.
Once added, you’ll want to add the user codes through Alarm.com.
In Users -> Edit User -> Access Control, click the lock icon to select Lock Access. If there is more than one lock on the system to add the desired amount of locks to the user.
In Access Code, enter the desired 8 digit access code. The first four would be for the panel, the full 8 would be for the lock in question.
Yes, the arrangement you described (first four digits applying to the panel and anything beyond this applying to the locks) is what I am used to with my other, non-Surety ADC account, and what I’ve been trying to achieve here. The fields simply will not let me enter anything beyond four digits.
The reason I suspected this as a generic ADC problem is because:
-My Surety ADC account will not allow me to enter more than 4 digits
-My non-Surety ADC account previously allowed me to enter more than 4 digits (up to 8, as you can see in my comparative screenshots). Previously-created accounts continue to show 8 digits, and are fully-functional.
-My non-Surety ADC account currently only allows me to enter 4 digits for new users that I create (just like what I’m seeing on my Surety ADC account, but unlike previously-created accounts on my non-Surety ADC account)
The signal between all nodes is good. The lock that I had un-enrolled and re-enrolled without better results is no further away from the panel than 10 feet, with only 1 interior wall in the way. The other lock is maybe 35 feet away, and with an enrolled light switch in between. However, from what I saw, signal strength of all nodes directly to the panel was good (and nothing was relying upon any neighboring nodes for comms).
While I admittedly join all devices in their final locations, I did also run a network rediscover after the fact, just in case, but with no better results.
Just to confirm, are the icons and scheduling options that I show as missing in my first 2 screenshots (but present in my 3rd screenshot from my non-Surety ADC account) what leads you to think that lock access has not fully completed?
I will work on un-enrolling both locks and joining just the one back immediately next to the panel to see if there is any difference in behavior. Unfortunately, this is at a new home that I’ve yet to move to, so it’s not something that I can try and report back on immediately.
I cannot speak toward the user interface of another provider but the images above labelled Surety-1 and Surety-2 do not appear to be the from the Surety ADC account. To confirm, images Surety-1 and Surety-2 are what you see in your Alarm.com account through Surety?
The image labelled Other-1 is more in line with what a users page would look like in your ADC account through Surety
What I can say is that the user lock access for all users/locks has failed which indicates a communication issue.
Whenever you learn a lock in, it needs to be within six feet of the controller and left there for about ten minutes after the pairing process to give the locks time to complete the secure enrollment process. Once done, the lock/panel can be put back in its installation point. Once all Z-Wave devices are in their installation points you will need to run a network rediscovery.
-My Surety ADC account will not allow me to enter more than 4 digits
-My non-Surety ADC account previously allowed me to enter more than 4 digits (up to 8, as you can see in my comparative screenshots). Previously-created accounts continue to show 8 digits, and are fully-functional.
-My non-Surety ADC account currently only allows me to enter 4 digits for new users that I create (just like what I’m seeing on my Surety ADC account, but unlike previously-created accounts on my non-Surety ADC account)
That’s interesting. So you have a separate ADC account and notice that you can no longer add codes longer than 4 digits to systems which already have 8-digit users?
Alarm.com does make enhancements to the website all the time, adding features etc. This may in fact be a bug that was introduced. We will try to recreate and verify. If we are unable to recreate, it is more likely a general communication issue.
Just to confirm, the “Surety-1” and “Surety-2” screenshots are what I see when I log in to Alarm.com for my Surety account. I see “Surety-1” when I go to Users | <Edit User from List>. I see “Surety-2” when I click on the Access Code.
“Other-1” is also from Alarm.com, but a different account from another provider.
Thank you for your insight about learning in the locks. I will retry this when I have the chance. Based on what you’re saying and what I’m seeing, I suspect that there may be more than one issue in play.
Jason,
Your understanding is exactly correct. From my other provider (also Alarm.com), all my existing users have 8 digit codes, and I see these 8-digit codes whenever I go now to edit them. However, for the purposes of the screenshot I took, I created a NEW user on this other account and am suddenly limited to 4 digits, just like what I’m seeing with my Surety account. So, I can observe some aspects of the 4-digit limitation across BOTH Alarm.com accounts (Surety and Other). The only place I can see 8-digit codes is for pre-existing users that I have on my older account.
Oh, one other thing just came to mind that may or may not be relevant: I do not yet have permanent WiFi access at the house where the Qolsys panel is at. When I was performing the initial panel configuration, I joined it up to my cell phone’s hot spot, so as to test dual-path comms and perform software updates. I assumed that all subsequent communication would be supported over the Verizon cell modem in the Qolsys panel, but maybe this isn’t really the case? FWIW, the panel shows 4/5 signal bars in its current location, and I’ve successfully run the cell connectivity tests.
I assumed that all subsequent communication would be supported over the Verizon cell modem in the Qolsys panel, but maybe this isn’t really the case?
Correct, cellular communication is used as the primary method, with concurrent broadband backup. Commands would be sent across cellular and missing a wifi connection would not preclude sending codes.
OK, so yesterday I did the following:
1.) Enabled my cell phone hotspot, just to make sure that the panel had maximum external communication abilities
2.) En-enrolled BOTH pre-existing locks from the panel
3.) Waited ~15 minutes, performed a factory reset on both locks, uninstalled them and packed them up in boxes. I had recently recognized that what I received were the Schlage BE469 NX locks (older Z-wave ones). While not relevant to the current predicaments, I had wanted to the newer Z-wave Plus models and so decided to replace them Schlage BE469 ZP locks (Z-wave Plus capable).
4.) Relocated the panel to within 3 feet of the FIRST door
5.) Installed and enrolled the first of the Schlage BE469 ZP locks
6.) Deliberately let the entire system sit as-is with no further user-induced action or activity for no less than 30 minutes (possible manual opening/closing of the door and lock notwithstanding)
7.) Reconfigured the first lock for 8-digit user codes, then waited an additional 15 minutes
8.) Relocated the panel to within 3 feet of the SECOND door
9.) Installed and enrolled the second of the Schlage BE469 ZP locks
10.) Deliberately let the entire system sit as-is with no further user-induced action or activity for no less than 30 minutes (possible manual opening/closing of the door and lock notwithstanding)
11.) Reconfigured the second lock for 8-digit user codes, then waited an additional 15 minutes
12.) Relocated the panel back to its final location, performed a network rediscovery, verified both locks had good signal back to the panel, including direct communication without even having to rely upon a neighboring node, performed WiFi and Cell dual-path tests to verify that everything was still good
13.) Kept my cell phone hotspot on for maybe another hour
14.) Left the premises (taking my cell phone and its hotspot with me)
I wasn’t able to do anything further until about an hour later. At this time, I logged into alarm.com and saw nothing substantially different than mentioned originally above. Everything shows exactly the same as in the “Surety-1” and “Surety-2” screenshots above. Only difference is that the 4-digit codes showed up at GRAY at this time. I proceeded to assign lock access to users.
This morning, I logged back in and the only difference I see is that ALL of my 4-digit codes are now RED.
So, to summarize my observations and current problem(s):
1.) All user codes show up in RED (presumably indicating some issue)
2.) ADC web site will still not allow me to configure anything beyond 4-digit user codes (field will not allow me to enter anything beyond a 4th digit)
3.) Scheduling features are totally missing
4.) ADC interface / look and feel is different from what is normal and what I see with my other provider’s ADC account - no Access Control icons; the closest I get is what I show in my original “Surety-2” screenshot above
5.) My OTHER, NON-SURETY ADC account still shows my PRE-EXISTING users with 8-digit codes, but prevents me from creating NEW users with codes any longer than 4 digits
I am more convinced than ever that there is some problem on the Alarm.com side.
I am more convinced than ever that there is some problem on the Alarm.com side.
I do think you are correct here. I have a hunch as to the issue, to help get to the bottom of it, see below:
4.) ADC interface / look and feel is different from what is normal and what I see with my other provider’s ADC account – no Access Control icons; the closest I get is what I show in my original “Surety-2” screenshot above
5.) My OTHER, NON-SURETY ADC account still shows my PRE-EXISTING users with 8-digit codes, but prevents me from creating NEW users with codes any longer than 4 digits
I am curious, what is the URL you are seeing when you access the Users page in the Alarm.com website? Do you see the ability to edit push devices on your users list?
While logged into my ADC account with my Surety credentials, if I then manually attempt to access the https://www.alarm.com/web/Users/Users.aspx URL, I then get an error stating “You don’t have permission to access the requested page.”
I haven’t attempted to enroll any push devices yet on my Surety account. I’ll take a closer look at this shortly…
I haven’t attempted to enroll any push devices yet on my Surety account. I’ll take a closer look at this shortly..
This is actually a known rare issue. We’ve seen the users page inconsistency reported when someone was trying to delete a Push device but could not find the controls. You won’t (or shouldn’t with the error) see Push Devices listed there.
This seems to be a bug related to the ADC website. I’ve only seen this issue twice I believe, and cannot recreate, so it is proving difficult to pinpoint a cause, although this fits the pattern and should assist ADC in tracking down the issue now.
Out of curiosity, are you able to use the Users Management in the ADC app and send codes to your system/lock? The App has a dedicated Users Management section with code separate from the site.
Unfortunately, no, the ADC app (Android) displays Users pretty much identically to how they’re shown when logged into the web site with my Surety credentials. Look and feel (and missing controls) aside, attempting to edit the user codes this way from the app also imposes the same 4-digit restriction.
I am speaking with ADC and have more info on this. The system/users file path is actually the newer one, developed with the intent so that the app and website can better mirror info to users.
Not everyone sees this new URL, I am trying to determine the criteria with ADC now. Definitely only primary logins currently see it however, so a quick work-around currently would be to create a secondary Alarm.com login with write access to users in order to see the old page.
Since the issue is present across all your accounts though for setting new codes with 8 digits, this won’t be resolved by the secondary login. This is likely development they are actively working on since it is affecting all new users.
I am expecting more info shortly and will follow up with what I hear in terms of ETA/expectations.
Thanks for the update! Yes, you are spot-on - creating a secondary login allows me to see the interface I am used to, including additional controls and push devices. As you stated, even from this view it still will not allow me to enter >4 digits, though everything else appears as expected.
Looking forward to hearing back as to an ETA for a fix or workaround… Thank you very much for your attention with this!
Unfortunately I’ve heard word from ADC that this is a specific limitation with Schlage locks due to their built in code limitations. Schlage locks must be set to receive a specific length of code rather than accepting up to a certain size, and sending any other length through Alarm.com has caused numerous syncing problems in the past.
ADC has purposefully removed the ability to send longer codes to Schlage locks because of this. Only 4 digit codes can be supported at this time.
Longer codes are still supported on other manufacturer models.
Thanks, Jason. That is unfortunate, as the Schlage locks have a reputation for superior [physical] security, so it’s less than ideal to force a restriction to use shorter user code. Schlage locks can be configured locally for codes of any length between 4 and 8. I’ve only ever used 8-digit codes with my old Schlage locks with my old provider and have never had a problem, but I understand that there must be an issue there somewhere.
At any rate, I understand that this situation is what it is (hopefully it is temporary??). I can confirm that everything appears to be working if I were to reconfigure for 4-digit codes.
Thanks for your help and insight, it is genuinely appreciated!
