Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-05 from 926 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
App Store
This analysis describes version 3.6.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 3.6.0, updated 2026-08-26.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 3.6.2 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 3.6.2, updated 2026-09-02.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 4
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Paywall with no way past it
Woeful. Went from free to subscription only and changed the name of the app (although it still shows up in the A section as if it's still Aiwit - amateurish developers.) Pretty much landfill now. Can't use it without paying, not even live…
The basic features of just checking the live view of who is at your door requires a subscription. What's the point of a camera that you can't use without paying ridiculous amount for the basic thing. I get paying to play back but even pay…
Why am I paying now to view my video I’m not using your recording feature or anything else — Not happy that I can’t use my cameras without paying you for the view only feature
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
Throwing camera in trash and uninstalling the app. I've had the camera for a little under a year. When I got it, it did what I needed it to do, which was live view and the 2 way feature. A few months ago it all changed. Seems like a bait…
Woeful. Went from free to subscription only and changed the name of the app (although it still shows up in the A section as if it's still Aiwit - amateurish developers.) Pretty much landfill now. Can't use it without paying, not even live…
threw it in the trash, your not forcing me to pay a subscription just to view my camera....Bait and switch folks, stay away.
Paywall blocks the basics
Puts security behind a paywall. It is so unbelievably slow to react, and you cannot properly just view camera, unless subscribed. So the tech is really useless. You may as well get a ring cam, so what is the point of this dog turd. Are…
Was good but everything comes to an end eventually. Its very diabolical to hold the captures and recordings hostage behind a paywall and they only offer a 3day trial once done you have to continue to pay otherwise can't view videos at all…
The basic features of just checking the live view of who is at your door requires a subscription. What's the point of a camera that you can't use without paying ridiculous amount for the basic thing. I get paying to play back but even pay…
What this app sells
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.