Too many locks?

Hi all,

I have a RM4.0 rule that watches the HSM state (night and away) and when true it should lock multiple locks (in this case 4). However it seems that when I set it to lock more than 2 locks it just won't work. When I manually run the rule, I can see in the logs that it runs but the commands for the individual locks don't get sent. Did I miss something obvious? Or is this a potential bug? Thanks!

Locks are Yale Z-Wave Deadbolt

Not sure, as I've never used locks with HE, but you may want to consider splitting them up into two commands, and delaying the second command to lock 2 locks by 10 seconds.

1 Like

This :point_up: Locks are secure Zwave and very chatty so sending a lock command to 4 locks can slow down your Zwave mesh. Use varying delays to see what works best. Also consider repeaters to make sure your mesh is in good shape.

1 Like

You will have better success with adding a delay between lock commands


1 Like

The reason for this is that the locks are battery powered so they do not keep a constant connection with the hub. What they do is "partner up" with a repeater that supports "beaming". When the repeater receives a message for the lock it sends that command several times in a row to make sure the lock gets it when it wakes up. So, if two locks use the same beaming repeater, you're going to see delays in the commands completing. I believe a repeater can only beaming repeat to one device at a time. It has to finish one before it can do the other.


Try @jwetzel1492's Lockdown for size.
I had the exact same issues with 3 locks.

Never looked back since using this.



Thanks everyone! This has been a great education on locks, low power and beaming. I do have repeaters (Monoprice Outlets), but had no idea the locks communicated differently.

The Lockdown app seems to work great and I'd recommend it in my short time of use.

Now after doing all this research I've come across this Z-Wave lock S0 vulnerability, that seems to be marginally concerning. Can't seem to find if this is a resolved in Z-Wave Plus. Anyone have insight into this?

Again thanks everyone for the great advice!

The vulnerability is only exposed at the time the devices are paired, and not related to Z-Wave or Plus. Also, HE doesn't support S2 security and not many hubs do.
Worth repeating, The FBI's findings are that unauthorized access is split roughly 50/50 with unlocked doors or windows and brute force. Picking or hacking a lock doesn't even enter the FBI picture. Thieves are in and gone usually under a minute.

@zarthan Thanks for the insight. Agreed that this isn't really a security concern per se. Was just interested to know if there was a resolution. I'm fairly certain no one cares enough about me sit outside my house and scan z-wave while at the off chance I'm pairing a device :joy:

The S0/S2 questions come up in the communities. S2 is just now beginning to appear in more devices. I think it is a requirement for new devices (not positive). At some point, we will all need start dealing with S2 security, but unless you are willing to toss out everything and start again, the lesser standard will be with us for a long time.

Hubitat has said they have no plans to implement S2 anytime soon.