Conclusion: using SSO with Google is generally considered safer by security experts compared to using password manager generated passwords with MFA. Only when digital sovereignty is very important to an organization, using unique passwords generated by a password manager with MFA is the preferred option.
Why SSO is considered safer by security experts
The main reasons:
- No passwords to steal: the most common attack vector (phishing, credential stuffing, data breaches) simply doesn't apply if there are no app passwords
- Centralised enforcement: MFA, access policies, and offboarding are guaranteed, not dependent on individual behaviour
- Fewer credentials in circulation: every additional password is a potential weak point, even if generated by Proton Pass
However, security experts also flag the single point of failure risk: if your Google account is compromised, everything is. So the consensus is usually:
SSO is safer if the central account (Google) is very well protected: strong MFA, monitored for suspicious logins, and tightly managed.
For a small organisation, the honest answer is that the difference is small if Proton Pass is used correctly. The bigger security wins are things like enforcing MFA everywhere and having a solid offboarding process, regardless of which method you use.
Differences: unique generated passwords vs. SSO with Google
(green = pro, orange = minor con, red = major con)
| Topic | Proton Pass generated unique password | SSO with Google |
|---|---|---|
| App compatibility | Works with any app, regardless of SSO support | Only works with apps that support SAML/OAuth SSO |
| Setup | Must enforce MFA per app individually (= a bit of admin work), but possible for most app | Each connected app must be configured individually (= a bit of admin work)* |
| Phishing resistance | Proton Pass only autofills on the real URL: fake sites don't work | No app passwords exist to steal in the first place |
| Google dependency | None: Google account compromise doesn't affect other apps | Single point of failure: Google account compromise affects everything |
| Privacy | Swiss infrastructure, strong GDPR alignment | Google processes authentication data |
| Offboarding | Must deactivate each app account separately: risk of missing one (= solvable with a good checklist / responsibilities) | Disable Google account = access revoked instantly (for all tools that use SSO > still check the others!) |
*SSO by Google step by step
For each app you want to connect to Google SSO, you need to go into Google Workspace Admin and set up the integration. This typically involves:
- Adding the app in the Admin console
- Exchanging technical details between Google and the app (URLs, certificates, entity IDs)
- Testing it
- And, importantly, doing this again on the app's side too
Some apps have a pre-built Google integration that makes this relatively easy (e.g. Slack, Asana). Others require more manual technical work. And if an app doesn't support SAML or OAuth at all, you simply can't connect it.
But doesn't using SSO this way lock us into Google?
In theory, no. SSO is an open standard (SAML 2.0 / OIDC). Switching identity providers means reconfiguring which provider your tools trust — not rebuilding your entire toolstack. You move the key, not the doors.
In practice, it takes real effort:
- Moving away from Google is possible , but requires reconfiguring every connected app, migrating email/calendar data, and retraining users.
- Alternative EU providers exist (see below), but none offer the one-click "Login with Google" convenience users expect. Most SaaS tools support Google and Microsoft out of the box; custom SAML/OIDC setup requires technical work, an Enterprise tier, or both.
- Some tools only support SSO on their most expensive tier (the "SSO tax"). Asana, for example, puts SAML SSO behind its top-tier plan — meaning enforced SSO may not be available for clients on free or nonprofit plans.
European identity provider alternatives
If digital sovereignty is a priority, there are EU-based alternatives to Google as identity provider:
- La Suite Numérique (France, government-backed) includes an identity layer but has less consumer polish and limited "Login with..." integrations.
- Zitadel (Switzerland) has strong multi-tenancy support, good for B2B setups, but requires self-hosting or managed cloud.
- Authentik (open source, self-hosted) is flexible and can proxy apps without native SSO support, but is heavier to maintain.
- Keycloak (open source, Red Hat) is battle-tested with EU-hosted options available, but heavier to configure.
None of these offer the frictionless login buttons Google has earned through ubiquity, so migration involves real tradeoffs in usability and setup effort.
What about Proton as identity provider?
- Proton Pass supports SSO, but only in one direction: you can log into Proton using an external identity provider (Google, Okta, Entra). Proton cannot yet act as the identity provider that logs you into Asana, Slack, and other SaaS. This is a frequently requested feature but not available as of June 2026.
What tools support SSO?
See: