Hi
Let's say i'm having a party, and my Sonos is playing the music.
Many of my guests are friends that earlier has gotten access to my WiFi. During the party, these guests could download Sonos Controller/app, connect to Sonos, and start controlling the music.
There is no way in Sonos controllers to set a password, to avoid this behaviour.
Other workarounds would be setting up a guest WiFi network that doesn't have access to Sonos, but this would require a new router (in som cases), or change my original password in my entire existing network, which would be annoying ;)
Are there any plans to add this feature?
Maybe even a possibility to require a password for each Sonos device (tick box in controller preferences for each device?)
Am i missing something, other than keeping my guests sober and not annoying 😃
Page 7 / 8
Hi John, he got it from the Router in the hall way.
I will have a look at the router
Thanks
Take the plastic card off the back, assuming there's one there.
I own a restaurant and use Sonos and our wireless is available to the public for use. I am going to have to get another router and set up Sonos on it because all my staff have downloaded the app and change the music. No, they don't have the authority to, but policing it is a pain. Would be so much easier if Sonos did have password protection, just my 2 cents. I don't know why this is such a big deal.
Most routers allow you to set up both a private and a public or "Guest" WiFi. If your guests/staff have access to your private WiFi account, I would be far more concerned about them having access to your local LAN than being able to change the music on Sonos. Any documents, pictures, invoicing programs, etc. you have on your LAN will be exposed to anyone who has access. For your own security, get your guests and staff on a guest account and keep your private WiFi private.
I don't have time to read the entire thread here. But from what I have read the most fundamental reasoning for password protection or pins for device access have been overlooked. In my house I share with my not so technical flatmate, in our common areas of the house we have sonos. But in both our bed rooms and bathrooms we also have sonos speakers. In addition to this both our guests rooms have a similar set up. Lovely setup. That is until someone comes home 3am in the morning and makes a mistake and music full blast into your bedroom. In the past 3 weeks this has happened to me twice and has really strained my relationship with my house mate and our guests. This is a nightmare. We are not network guys. Does not seem reasonable that we would need 4 or more segmented networks to protect from this when a simple pin access number could be used to limit access to the private speakers versus the common area ones. We also have chromecasts in all the same areas and their simple pin access overcomes these problems from people casting content into my room.
This is a big deal. I love the system in every single way except this one omission. I can't believe that many havnt suffered this problem, been blasted in the middle of the night accidentally by a valid user of the system. Another small side effect is I listen to pod casts in my bathroom speaker. I just control playback with the hardware switch. But if someone takes over that speaker, I lose my place in my podcast.
Look again, I really hope someone is still taking this thread seriously. I have 25 sonos units (playbars/play5-1/connect amp etc) not cheap. If there is some solution without having to get a network specialist in to firewall each private zone I would love to hear about it. Amazingly enough this was the last technical issue I expected to have with the sonos system. I made the biggest common mistake people make, I just assumed zones/protection would not be a problem. I am so passionate about this, I want to just keep writing. But I will stop and hope someone is actually listening and understanding the negative effect this is having on my relationships in our house.
This is a big deal. I love the system in every single way except this one omission. I can't believe that many havnt suffered this problem, been blasted in the middle of the night accidentally by a valid user of the system. Another small side effect is I listen to pod casts in my bathroom speaker. I just control playback with the hardware switch. But if someone takes over that speaker, I lose my place in my podcast.
Look again, I really hope someone is still taking this thread seriously. I have 25 sonos units (playbars/play5-1/connect amp etc) not cheap. If there is some solution without having to get a network specialist in to firewall each private zone I would love to hear about it. Amazingly enough this was the last technical issue I expected to have with the sonos system. I made the biggest common mistake people make, I just assumed zones/protection would not be a problem. I am so passionate about this, I want to just keep writing. But I will stop and hope someone is actually listening and understanding the negative effect this is having on my relationships in our house.
I think the trouble is it is not a case of simple pin. In your case it would need to be pin for Each Sonos unit and then the ability to store different accounts, plus an admin account.
So whilst I can see your need I think the task would take some considerable work so unless it is being worked on current it would be quite some time before it were to appear. Probably after you current situation has been resolved by other means 😞
So whilst I can see your need I think the task would take some considerable work so unless it is being worked on current it would be quite some time before it were to appear. Probably after you current situation has been resolved by other means 😞
@bockersjv, thanks for your reply. I understand for the users looking for a security solution to this problem a admin portion of the app would be required. But to stop accidental access to specific speakers could be an easier job. But given sonos penetration in both homes and commercial spaces you think that this would be a given.
Each unit has a MAC address already (unique addressable id) , so you would think something could be done with this. Or the other way, you supply a list of MAC address's (white list) of the devices that are able to add a speaker to a group. It would seem a single higher level other than groups is required, zones (a group of groups). And the ability to grant the zones permissions in one way or another. This is a basic fundamental that almost everything authorisation on our devices uses. Workgroups/user etc...sure there are other auth types, but just looking for some basic commonsense way here. The accidental use case does not need to be un-hackable.
Each unit has a MAC address already (unique addressable id) , so you would think something could be done with this. Or the other way, you supply a list of MAC address's (white list) of the devices that are able to add a speaker to a group. It would seem a single higher level other than groups is required, zones (a group of groups). And the ability to grant the zones permissions in one way or another. This is a basic fundamental that almost everything authorisation on our devices uses. Workgroups/user etc...sure there are other auth types, but just looking for some basic commonsense way here. The accidental use case does not need to be un-hackable.
I can see why this is a problem for a lot of people, but I can also see why it would create some issues with the product as well.
First, although it would add features to the system, it would also make it more complex. Even if it is a one time setup, it would deter a lot of customers sense something really easy now became complex.
Second, I don't think the framework of the software is setup to accommodate this very well. I am guessing here, but from my experience, a change like this wouldn't be adding code in a spot or two, but a major rewrite of existing code. You'd have to break it and rebuild it. That means that what currently works without issue might be a little buggy. Some of the older hardware not be able to accommodate the change very well. I don't know, still guessing here.
That said though, I think I would welcome an implementation of user profiles. As suggested, a user profile could have access to specific zones. That way, a kid's profile would not be able turn on music in the parents bedroom. A guest would only have access to a zones setup for a guest profile. I can see myself utilizing this as I don't want my kids setting music in my bedroom (not that they would anyway). I also would allow guest to set music in the zone outside, but nothing inside.
But if you're going to do that, why not also set a profile for music sources? Your kids will only access sources they need, while I can have my embarrassing Celine Dion playlist in private. Perhaps guest only have access to basic radio stations.
So your flatmate couldn't turn on the music in your room, play your music, or set your queue. I would be as if it user profile sees an entirely different Sonos system.
To be clear, I see this as somewhat of a pipe dream. I don't know that this could be done on the existing hardware, and perhaps may need to be some sort of cloud setup. I also think it will be less necessary, and also less enforceable with voice control (how do you stop someone from speaking?) coming soon.
In the end, given that I don't know what I don't know, I would opt to leave it up to Sonos to make the best choices for features like this. They know what can be done in their framework and obviously put more effort into considering the user experience than I do.
First, although it would add features to the system, it would also make it more complex. Even if it is a one time setup, it would deter a lot of customers sense something really easy now became complex.
Second, I don't think the framework of the software is setup to accommodate this very well. I am guessing here, but from my experience, a change like this wouldn't be adding code in a spot or two, but a major rewrite of existing code. You'd have to break it and rebuild it. That means that what currently works without issue might be a little buggy. Some of the older hardware not be able to accommodate the change very well. I don't know, still guessing here.
That said though, I think I would welcome an implementation of user profiles. As suggested, a user profile could have access to specific zones. That way, a kid's profile would not be able turn on music in the parents bedroom. A guest would only have access to a zones setup for a guest profile. I can see myself utilizing this as I don't want my kids setting music in my bedroom (not that they would anyway). I also would allow guest to set music in the zone outside, but nothing inside.
But if you're going to do that, why not also set a profile for music sources? Your kids will only access sources they need, while I can have my embarrassing Celine Dion playlist in private. Perhaps guest only have access to basic radio stations.
So your flatmate couldn't turn on the music in your room, play your music, or set your queue. I would be as if it user profile sees an entirely different Sonos system.
To be clear, I see this as somewhat of a pipe dream. I don't know that this could be done on the existing hardware, and perhaps may need to be some sort of cloud setup. I also think it will be less necessary, and also less enforceable with voice control (how do you stop someone from speaking?) coming soon.
In the end, given that I don't know what I don't know, I would opt to leave it up to Sonos to make the best choices for features like this. They know what can be done in their framework and obviously put more effort into considering the user experience than I do.
As someone who just setup their first Sonos system on an Enterprise network I can honestly say that once you configure your environment correctly, which Sonos is severely lacking in documenation for those kinds of setups, the system itself sounds fantastic.
But if Sonos ever wants these to be user friendly in large scale networks they need to implement a simple password process to take control of a discovered Sonos system. This is the systems only flaw that I have found.
Yes you can setup special SSID's just for system to use but if you want users to be able to discover and control the system from a completely different network you are opening up that system to be controlled by other users. Can you segment the networks so you can only control the Sonos from a particular subnet or SSID....yes. But you shouldn't have to create 3 networks (1 for general users, 1 for the sonos system and 1 more for Sonos control). That is a completely unrealistic request when Sonos could just attach a password process for zone/system control upon discovery.
For those of you saying that adding a password to control a sonos system is just adding complexity to a system that is supposed to be easy to use....a user has to enter a password to jump on a separate SSID setup for sonos control, or enter a password to join a wireless network to begin with anyway so that argument doesn't hold water. For those of you saying it would be difficult for Sonos to implement that's total BS. They systems themselves are already able to do WPA2-PSK authentication to be able to join wireless networks so implementing an access password to take control of a system is something they should be able to do with a firmware update.
Get to work Sonos! You've created a great sounding wireless speaker system. Now make it so these systems can securely be used in all kinds of networks and not just in your home.
But if Sonos ever wants these to be user friendly in large scale networks they need to implement a simple password process to take control of a discovered Sonos system. This is the systems only flaw that I have found.
Yes you can setup special SSID's just for system to use but if you want users to be able to discover and control the system from a completely different network you are opening up that system to be controlled by other users. Can you segment the networks so you can only control the Sonos from a particular subnet or SSID....yes. But you shouldn't have to create 3 networks (1 for general users, 1 for the sonos system and 1 more for Sonos control). That is a completely unrealistic request when Sonos could just attach a password process for zone/system control upon discovery.
For those of you saying that adding a password to control a sonos system is just adding complexity to a system that is supposed to be easy to use....a user has to enter a password to jump on a separate SSID setup for sonos control, or enter a password to join a wireless network to begin with anyway so that argument doesn't hold water. For those of you saying it would be difficult for Sonos to implement that's total BS. They systems themselves are already able to do WPA2-PSK authentication to be able to join wireless networks so implementing an access password to take control of a system is something they should be able to do with a firmware update.
Get to work Sonos! You've created a great sounding wireless speaker system. Now make it so these systems can securely be used in all kinds of networks and not just in your home.
Possibility of this happening just to accommodate Enterprise networks - Zero.
Bummer. I'd say Sonos must not like making money but with the price of these systems for home users they obviously do.
I figure the number of home users with Enterprise networks is initially a low percentage of the market, and those that would allow guests unfettered access to their local LAN instead of an internet only guest network even more minuscule. Enterprise networks are usually associated with more strict levels of access security.
Those companies that focus on selected markets - by definition that means ignoring all others - almost always make more money in the long term than those that do not do so.
I'm not sure who sonos put in charge of this forum, but the attitude is awful. Just got a sonos for Christmas and this was one of the first things I thought about. Getting into the router each time I want to allow or disallow access to my sonos network doesn't work for me.
So, I'm having a party and I want to control the music. No one gets my private network password. Someone has another playlist and wants to take control of the music? I have to give them access to my network. No longer a guest network and I have to go change my router to secure it again.
This is a shortfall of the system. Admit it. There should be an easy way to secure, or share, the system within the sonos app. Hey, how about sonos setup a guest and private feature. Much easier than changing the router each time.
So, I'm having a party and I want to control the music. No one gets my private network password. Someone has another playlist and wants to take control of the music? I have to give them access to my network. No longer a guest network and I have to go change my router to secure it again.
This is a shortfall of the system. Admit it. There should be an easy way to secure, or share, the system within the sonos app. Hey, how about sonos setup a guest and private feature. Much easier than changing the router each time.
Hi All,
Bought my first unit for my son's Christmas present. With the intention of expanding into a whole house system when we move into new house. The house is being fitted with in ceiling speakers pretty much throughout the place and I have run the cables to a central point where a bank of Connect:amps are planned to bring music to our ears.
I've come from a now pretty much end of life Squeezebox system.
This was a flawless and customisable system- admittedly perhaps too complicated for the masses and hence it's long term failure.
Sonos seemed the logical easy step.
For all those not understanding the need to restrict controllers to certain players I can't think of a reason why you shouldn't be able to do this!
I don't want my Son (accidentally or otherwise) putting on music in other zones. Or changing the volume etc
Music servers should also be set up to allow restrictions to controllers.
This is a big short coming as far as I can tell.
13 years in the asking on this forum so I don't think it will get sorted unfortunately...
Nic 🙂
Bought my first unit for my son's Christmas present. With the intention of expanding into a whole house system when we move into new house. The house is being fitted with in ceiling speakers pretty much throughout the place and I have run the cables to a central point where a bank of Connect:amps are planned to bring music to our ears.
I've come from a now pretty much end of life Squeezebox system.
This was a flawless and customisable system- admittedly perhaps too complicated for the masses and hence it's long term failure.
Sonos seemed the logical easy step.
For all those not understanding the need to restrict controllers to certain players I can't think of a reason why you shouldn't be able to do this!
I don't want my Son (accidentally or otherwise) putting on music in other zones. Or changing the volume etc
Music servers should also be set up to allow restrictions to controllers.
This is a big short coming as far as I can tell.
13 years in the asking on this forum so I don't think it will get sorted unfortunately...
Nic 🙂
For something that has been on request for 14 year you would figure that this wouldn't be a problem. So what I'm being told by people that think they understand the world is that the number of people who this feature would benefit is so small that it would be negligible to implement. That statement right there is flawed immediately for the small fact that this is a request this is ranging over a DECADE. On top of which I can't very well create a separate LAN network when I'm in college and had no power on the system. I am writing this about 10 minutes after having my speaker just randomly cycle through 5 different songs that were not of my doing. This is the result of someone in my building thinking they are listening to their music but just connected to my speaker. What I'm being told is that in a building that has the same network ranging nearly a mile, a password system would be completely useless when people with the same speaker or app can just access my speaker, that I paid $200+ for, and be a okay? Can someone with an actual brain explain to me the sound logic behind that? And yes I understand that in the grand scheme of things $200 is pocket change, but for people who have spent upwards of 10k on an extensive system (which isn't hard) would be happy to know a simple feature like this is included in their rather hefty investment.
As a software developer, this seems like a pretty simple thing to fix. I will admit that most of the people on my home network are trustworthy and I don't have an issue with them having access to control my shared devices. But there are a few relevant points in this thread where users share their WIFI with a roommate accidentally playing music in the bedrooms at all hours of the night, etc. Rather than forcing users to create separate networks or maintain a password, the app just needs to allow an administrator (the first user to set up the system) to grant access to other devices on the network trying to connect. By default, it can work the way it currently does in allowing everyone access. But, if a user wishes to limit who can access the system, they could choose to only allow approved devices to control the network. This would filter by the device MAC address and a user could grant any level of access to any one or more of the devices on the network.
A little thought would need to go into this, but I think it is a feature that could be implemented without much time and/or effort. It would allow the devices to function like they do now for so many of the users that prefer that, yet give a better level of control for users who would like that.
A little thought would need to go into this, but I think it is a feature that could be implemented without much time and/or effort. It would allow the devices to function like they do now for so many of the users that prefer that, yet give a better level of control for users who would like that.
The same 5 people that keep repeating "this isn't an issue" or "change your wifi settings" are infuriating. This lack of being able to password is the one reason I haven't yet purchased the Sonos, and am looking for alternatives.
So, I'm having a party and I want to control the music. No one gets my private network password. Someone has another playlist and wants to take control of the music? I have to give them access to my network. No longer a guest network and I have to go change my router to secure it again.
This is a shortfall of the system. Admit it. There should be an easy way to secure, or share, the system within the sonos app. Hey, how about sonos setup a guest and private feature. Much easier than changing the router each time.
Absolutely, but the guys here think they know best.
Aren't there two different issues here? The thread is headed 'password to avoid guests changing music', but what @bradjhooley is asking for (supported by @DrAmyColesh) is to be able to allow someone to play their own playlists without his having to reveal his network password, just a Sonos password.
There are many on this thread who complain 'my friends know my network password and now they keep messing with my Sonos'. I have very little sympathy with someone who is happy to let everyone he/she knows loose on their network and worries most about control of Sonos.
But @bradjhooley's request (if I understand correctly) is different and a perfectly reasonable thing to ask and wish for. I think there may be a technical issue though. Sonos is fundamentally a networked system. Put a controller even on a different subnet from the players and it won't see them. I think you just have to have your friend's phone on your network for the technology to work, and how is that to be achieved without full access?
One (imperfect but workable) solution for those with a Sonos component with a line-in is to get a Bluetooth receiver and allow friends to bypass the network.
There are many on this thread who complain 'my friends know my network password and now they keep messing with my Sonos'. I have very little sympathy with someone who is happy to let everyone he/she knows loose on their network and worries most about control of Sonos.
But @bradjhooley's request (if I understand correctly) is different and a perfectly reasonable thing to ask and wish for. I think there may be a technical issue though. Sonos is fundamentally a networked system. Put a controller even on a different subnet from the players and it won't see them. I think you just have to have your friend's phone on your network for the technology to work, and how is that to be achieved without full access?
One (imperfect but workable) solution for those with a Sonos component with a line-in is to get a Bluetooth receiver and allow friends to bypass the network.
If they have android controller they could connect direct to Sonosnet (assume running sonosnet)
You could change password temporarily for the night
add an access point to the main router with a different ssid password
You could change password temporarily for the night
add an access point to the main router with a different ssid password
You have to connect to the wifi network to connect then direct to Sonosnet?
The original question on this thread was actually from someone who was totally relaxed about all his friends being on his network, but not about them messing with his Sonos. I think it reasonable for the 'same five people' to point out that that is a pretty dumb perspective. It is technically possible to do (I imagine), but Sonos has so far not thought it important enough to do anything. This is not, however, what @bradjhooley was asking for in the post you quoted - he states, very sensibly, that there is no way he is giving out his wifi password.
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.