Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Motorola Vigilant vs Transmit Security

Motorola Vigilant logo

Motorola Vigilant

Cybersecurity

Fixed and mobile licence plate recognition with a shared law enforcement plate database

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Transmit Security logo

Transmit Security

Cybersecurity

Customer identity platform built around passwordless and fraud signals

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Motorola Vigilant state law can decide eligibility outright: California's SB 34 imposes operator duties and restricts sharing ALPR data with out-of-state and federal agencies, and agencies have been audited and found non-compliant.; Transmit Security pricing is not published, so it cannot be compared early against competitors that post per monthly active user rates, and the eventual quote often mixes per-user and per-transaction units.
  • They diverge on capability: Motorola Vigilant covers Fixed LPR cameras, Transmit Security covers Passwordless authentication.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Motorola Vigilant and Transmit Security actually diverge.

Attributes where Motorola Vigilant and Transmit Security differ
AttributeMotorola VigilantTransmit Security
PlatformsWeb, Windows, iOS, AndroidWeb, iOS, Android

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Motorola Vigilant

  • Fixed LPR cameras
  • Mobile LPR
  • LEARN database
  • VehicleManager analytics
  • Hotlist alerting
  • Published API
  • Audit logging

Only in Transmit Security

  • Passwordless authentication
  • Detection and response
  • Identity verification
  • Orchestration
  • Account recovery
  • Bot and automation detection
  • Composable APIs

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Motorola Vigilant

  • A police department building a hotlist alerting network on arterial roads into a jurisdictionnot Transmit Security
  • An investigator reconstructing a suspect vehicle's movements across multiple agency jurisdictionsnot Transmit Security
  • A toll or parking authority enforcing against a registered vehicle listnot Transmit Security
  • A sheriff's office locating a vehicle associated with an active AMBER or missing person alertnot Transmit Security

Transmit Security

  • A bank moving a consumer base off passwords to passkeys without losing customers at the migration stepnot Motorola Vigilant
  • An insurer whose account recovery flow is the main account takeover route and needs risk scoring inside itnot Motorola Vigilant
  • A retailer that wants bot detection at login rather than only at checkoutnot Motorola Vigilant
  • An organisation replacing an in-house customer login system that has become an unfunded engineering liabilitynot Motorola Vigilant

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Motorola Vigilant

  • State law can decide eligibility outright: California's SB 34 imposes operator duties and restricts sharing ALPR data with out-of-state and federal agencies, and agencies have been audited and found non-compliant.
  • Local surveillance technology ordinances increasingly require a published usage policy, retention limits and a public council hearing before purchase, which can add many months or block the procurement entirely.
  • Motorola has faced litigation over its dual role as ALPR operator and end user, so the legal exposure of the data-sharing model is unresolved and sits partly with the purchasing agency.
  • The value comes from the shared LEARN database, which means the capability an agency actually buys depends on what other agencies contribute, and that can shrink if peers withdraw for legal or political reasons.
  • Nothing is published on price, and camera hardware, database subscription and analytics are separate line items, so the multi-year total is far higher than the initial camera quote suggests.

Transmit Security

  • Pricing is not published, so it cannot be compared early against competitors that post per monthly active user rates, and the eventual quote often mixes per-user and per-transaction units.
  • Migrating a live consumer identity base is a high risk project, and credential migration constraints mean some users must re-register, which shows up as measurable churn.
  • The vendor is smaller than the identity incumbents, so the partner and systems integrator pool is thinner and staffing a large programme is harder.
  • Workforce identity is not the focus, so an organisation wanting one vendor for employees and customers will still run two platforms.
  • The fraud detection value depends on traffic volume feeding the models, so a smaller deployment gets less benefit from exactly the capability that justified choosing it over a plain identity provider.

Pricing, plan by plan

Motorola Vigilant

On request
  • Vigilant LPR$undefined/year
    • Fixed and mobile camera hardware quoted per unit
    • LEARN database access subscribed per agency
    • Analytics software licensed separately

Transmit Security

On request
  • Transmit Security Platform$undefined/year
    • Priced per monthly active user or per transaction by service
    • Services licensed individually or as a platform
    • Free developer tier for evaluation

Which should you pick?

Choose Motorola Vigilant if

  • You need fixed lpr cameras.
  • You work on Web, Windows, iOS, Android.
  • You also want mobile lpr.
Motorola Vigilant review

Choose Transmit Security if

  • You need passwordless authentication.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want detection and response.
Transmit Security review

Questions people ask

Is Motorola Vigilant or Transmit Security better?
Neither clearly leads. Motorola Vigilant starts at On request and Transmit Security at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Motorola Vigilant or Transmit Security?
Motorola Vigilant starts at On request and Transmit Security at On request.
Does Motorola Vigilant or Transmit Security run on more platforms?
Motorola Vigilant runs on Web, Windows, iOS, Android. Transmit Security runs on Web, iOS, Android.
What is Motorola Vigilant best used for?
Motorola Vigilant is most often used for a police department building a hotlist alerting network on arterial roads into a jurisdiction, an investigator reconstructing a suspect vehicle's movements across multiple agency jurisdictions, a toll or parking authority enforcing against a registered vehicle list, a sheriff's office locating a vehicle associated with an active amber or missing person alert. Of those, a police department building a hotlist alerting network on arterial roads into a jurisdiction and an investigator reconstructing a suspect vehicle's movements across multiple agency jurisdictions are not what Transmit Security is typically brought in for.
What can Motorola Vigilant do that Transmit Security cannot?
Motorola Vigilant covers Fixed LPR cameras, Mobile LPR, LEARN database, VehicleManager analytics. Transmit Security covers Passwordless authentication, Detection and response, Identity verification, Orchestration.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Motorola Vigilant: What is LEARN?

The Law Enforcement Archival Reporting Network, the shared database where plate reads from subscribing agencies are stored and queried. It is the core of the product.

Transmit Security: Do we have to replace our existing identity provider?

No. The services are composable, so detection and response or verification can be adopted alongside an existing provider such as Okta or Entra ID.

Motorola Vigilant: Can any agency buy it?

No. Several states restrict ALPR use and data sharing, and many municipalities require a published usage policy and a public hearing first. Check statute and local ordinance before budgeting.

Transmit Security: Is fraud detection an extra licence?

It is a separate service, but it is designed to run inside the authentication flow rather than as a bolted-on second vendor. Confirm which services are in your quote.

Motorola Vigilant: Does California allow sharing with federal agencies?

SB 34 restricts sharing ALPR information with out-of-state and federal agencies, and California agencies have been audited on precisely that point.

Transmit Security: Is there a way to try it?

Yes, a free developer tier exists for evaluation, though production use is an enterprise agreement.

Motorola Vigilant: Is it only for police?

No. Toll and parking authorities, and some commercial repossession and insurance operations, also use LPR, though the LEARN law enforcement network is agency restricted.

Share

Related pages

More on Motorola Vigilant

More on Transmit Security

Keep looking

Other head to heads