How about @maschera suggestion. Would this be workable?!
That’s a good idea, but I highly doubt Google would let that fly for security reasons. And that’s the most important part…security. Google would probably never allow a generic name or logo that doesn’t properly represent the company the user is giving their oauth credentials to.
If your app uses Google APIs to access Google users’ data, you might have to complete a verification process before you make your app publicly available for the first time.
- Apps that request sensitive scopes must verify that they follow Google’s API Services User Data Policy. This sensitive scopes verification process typically takes 3-5 business days to complete.
- Apps that request restricted scopes must also verify that they follow Google’s API Services User Data Policy, but they must also meet the Additional Requirements for Specific Scopes. One of these additional requirements is that if the app accesses or has the capability to access Google user data from or through a server, the system must undergo an independent (3P) security assessment. For this reason, this restricted scopes verification process can potentially take several weeks to complete.
I just want to add that you are granting permission to Google to share your authentication with a third party provider, such as Glide. Misrepresenting that to the user would not be good. If it was allowed, several spammers/hackers would be spoofing permission screens with legitimate but fake business logos and addresses, putting user’s data at risk.
I understand the concern, however you are connecting Google and Glide together, not Google and the individual app. All of this to save the user from having to check their email for a pin using the original authentication method.
was just going to suggest that too. +1
How can I see the emails of people that log in but do not leave a comment or chat message?
They should show in the App: Logins sheet or in a user profile sheet if you have enabled user profiles.
Thanks, Jeff. I’ll research this. I’ve only played with glide for a couple of days and I’m not a coder by trade so it will take me a bit before I’m familiar with all the ins and outs.
Maybe there’s a way to add some disclaimer next to the Google Sign In button like, “[appname] uses Glide to authenticate you. Glide is awesome. Be not afraid.”
Then it might look like your app uses Glide for this particular thing while giving the broader app a sense of independence. This is really just an issue of branding and company appearance more than anything.
Yep, late to the game. One of the reasons I abandoned them was that you had to do this on your own with developer accounts. UGH.
Jeff - Wix does that. They just use a generic name like ‘My site’ and don’t add a logo. I’m also surprised google let them do that. But the thing is, you don’t need to submit it for review if it doesn’t have an image. You can just name it ‘My app’ and not add an image.
I hope sign in with google is soon used by pro users!
Yeah, that’s very annoying. I managed to do one by myself, even not as a developer, for Adalo’s new sign in with google component, but it took a month
Will this be available with Sign-In Action and a Public sign-in method ?
Yes, I believe you do have that option.
Hmm, I can’t find a way to enable it though, the option doesn’t show in the Sign-in screen seettings…
Hey! Can we get Name and Image from Google account of the user and add it to user profile if user profile is activated for the app. I think it will be a really good feature.
Also, can we have an option to disable sign in with email and just keep sign in with google if we want
@Killko Have you looked in the Privacy settings?
I use Public as sign-in method as I want users to have limited access to some parts of the app before committing.
I then use a button with sign-in action once they’re ready to register.
In that scenario, I don’t see the Allow sign-in with Google checkbox…
What happens when you change to ‘Public with Email’, select the checkbox for sign in with Google, then change back to Public?
I can confirm this method still works.