Skip to content

feat: add support for using client id extracted from android app#634

Open
reey wants to merge 1 commit into
openviess:masterfrom
reey:feat/add-support-for-using-client-id-extracted-from-android-app
Open

feat: add support for using client id extracted from android app#634
reey wants to merge 1 commit into
openviess:masterfrom
reey:feat/add-support-for-using-client-id-extracted-from-android-app

Conversation

@reey

@reey reey commented Oct 24, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

By setting this scope I'm able to use the clientId I've been able to extract from the android app.

This should hopefully allow to use this integration without ratelimits..
I can provide the clientId I've been able to extract on request.

@lackas

lackas commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We've run both scopes side by side on the same account: the Internal scope does expose a lot more (roughly 2.4x the features here, including room actor mapping and per-module battery data), so the motivation is real. It is not a strict superset, though: a few dozen IoT features are absent under Internal (mostly per-room config flags, plus some VitoCharge PCC power values).

Two concerns with this change as written:

  1. It hardcodes Internal for everyone. That scope is only granted to the ViCare app's client id; a normal developer-portal client id (what most users and HA Core use) is not authorized for it, so forcing the scope breaks the standard flow. It should be opt-in, selected together with the app client id, not the default.
  2. That app client id is undocumented and extracted from the app, so Viessmann can rotate or revoke it anytime. Downstream, HA Core's "official APIs only" policy makes this unlikely to land in the mainline integration; a custom component is the realistic home for it.

Keeping the current default and adding an opt-in path (Internal scope + app client id) would let people who want it use it without regressing everyone else.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants