GHSA-392p-2q2v-4372 CVE-2026-53517
Better Auth: OAuth refresh-token rotation forks the token family on concurrent redemption
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- High · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.42%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 36.53% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-294 Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay
- CWE-362 Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')
- CWE-367 Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition
- CWE-613 Insufficient Session Expiration
- Fix
- Available
- 2 packages have a fixed version
Description
Am I affected?
Users are affected if all of the following are true:
- Their project depends on
@better-auth/oauth-providerat a version>= 1.6.0, < 1.6.11, or uses the embedded plugin inbetter-auth >= 1.4.8-beta.7, < 1.6.0. - At least one OAuth client served by their application's authorization server requests the
offline_accessscope, so refresh tokens are minted. - Concurrent redemption of the same refresh token is reachable: an SPA shares one refresh token across browser tabs without a mutex, a mobile client retries after a transient failure, an attacker who has stolen a refresh token times two requests, or a service worker queues offline requests.
If developer applications do not request offline_access for any client, no refresh tokens are minted and they are not exposed.
Fix:
- Upgrade to
@better-auth/oauth-provider@1.6.11or later. - If developers cannot upgrade, see workarounds below.
Summary
The OAuth provider's POST /oauth2/token endpoint, on the refresh_token grant, performs a non-atomic read / validate / revoke / mint sequence on the oauthRefreshToken row. Two concurrent requests presenting the same parent refresh token both pass the revocation check before either revoke completes, so each mints a fresh refresh token. The replay-detection branch only fires when revoked is already truthy at read time, which is exactly the state concurrent attackers race past. The result is a forked refresh-token family from a single parent token.
Details
The adapter.update predicate on the parent row is keyed on id only; it does not include revoked IS NULL, so two concurrent updates both succeed (last-write-wins, no error path). The schema does not declare unique on oauthRefreshToken.token, so concurrent creates do not collide on a unique-key violation either.
RFC 9700 §4.14 (OAuth Security Best Current Practice) prescribes refresh-token family invalidation on detected reuse; this implementation tries to enforce that contract through the revoked check, but the check is not atomic with the consumption step. Token rotation issues a new refresh token with each call, so a single stolen refresh token grants indefinite access until the row is revoked or its refreshTokenExpiresAt (default 7 days) passes. Rotation refreshes that window each call.
The fix lands an atomic compare-and-swap on the parent row inside the rotation primitive (UPDATE ... WHERE id = ? AND revoked IS NULL with a rowcount check), so the losing rotation fails closed with invalid_grant and the parent row stays marked revoked. Subsequent replay of the original refresh token then trips the existing family-invalidation guard. The schema gains a unique constraint on oauthRefreshToken.token for parity with oauthAccessToken.token.
Patches
Fixed in @better-auth/oauth-provider@1.6.11. The refresh-token rotation primitive now performs an atomic compare-and-swap on the parent row, and the explicit revokeRefreshToken path uses the same CAS. On a contested rotation, exactly one caller wins and mints a fresh refresh token; the loser receives invalid_grant. Subsequent replay of the original refresh token trips the existing family-invalidation guard because the parent row stays marked revoked.
@better-auth/memory-adapter@1.6.11 ships a compatibility fix in the same wave: the in-memory where clause now treats undefined and null as equivalent under an eq null predicate, mirroring SQL IS NULL and Mongo's missing-or-null semantics. Without this change, the CAS predicate WHERE revoked IS NULL falls through on every call against a row whose optional revoked field is absent (the adapter factory's transformInput skips writing undefined when no default exists), so the rotation above is broken for any deployment using the in-memory adapter.
Strict refresh-token family invalidation on a contested rotation, per RFC 9700 §4.14 (which calls for invalidating the winner's tokens too when reuse is detected at rotation time), is deferred to a follow-up minor on the next channel. Closing it cleanly requires an opt-in transactional rotation in the adapter contract so the family-delete cannot interleave with the winner's in-flight access-token insert. The deferred site carries a FIXME(strict-family-invalidation) marker.
Schema-migration note: the better-auth migration generator only emits UNIQUE for newly-created columns. Existing installs will not pick up the new oauthRefreshToken.token unique constraint from migrate / generate; add it manually if an application's operational tooling depends on it (CREATE UNIQUE INDEX oauth_refresh_token_token_uniq ON "oauthRefreshToken" (token);). The CAS fix above does not depend on the database-level constraint to be correct; the constraint is defense-in-depth so collisions from a buggy custom generateRefreshToken callback fail loudly.
Workarounds
None of these close the bug fully without a code patch.
- Adapter-level: configure the database adapter to run the OAuth refresh handler under serializable isolation, or wrap the
adapter.updateonoauthRefreshTokenwith a row-level pessimistic lock (SELECT ... FOR UPDATE). Narrows the window without closing it. - Token lifetime: pass
oauthProvider({ refreshTokenExpiresIn: 60 })to expire forked families within one minute. Trades attacker persistence for shorter user sessions. - Client-side single-flight: serialize refresh-token usage in the client SDK with a mutex. Mitigates honest concurrency but does nothing against an attacker with a stolen refresh token.
- Disable refresh tokens: do not request the
offline_accessscope. Closes the surface but breaks long-lived sessions.
Impact
- Indefinite access from a single stolen refresh token: forked refresh-token families grant access at the original user's authorization scope, surviving past any single revocation if an attacker holds any branch.
- Detection bypass: legitimate users whose refresh token has been forked do not trip family invalidation when they refresh, because the attacker's branch already swapped the parent row out from under the legitimate user's check.
Credit
Reported by @chdanielmueller.
Resources
- CWE-362: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization (Race Condition)
- CWE-367: Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition
- CWE-294: Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay
- CWE-613: Insufficient Session Expiration
- RFC 9700 §4.14: Refresh Token Protection
- RFC 6749 §6: Refreshing an Access Token
Affected versions
npm
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| @better-auth/oauth-provider | >= 1.6.0, < 1.6.11 |
1.6.11 |
| better-auth | >= 1.4.8-beta.7, < 1.6.0 |
1.6.0 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
@better-auth/oauth-provider npm → 1.6.11
- npm
npm install @better-auth/oauth-provider@1.6.11- yarn
yarn add @better-auth/oauth-provider@1.6.11- pnpm
pnpm add @better-auth/oauth-provider@1.6.11
better-auth npm → 1.6.0
- npm
npm install better-auth@1.6.0- yarn
yarn add better-auth@1.6.0- pnpm
pnpm add better-auth@1.6.0
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- High
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- High
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
CVSS 3.1 8.1
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-294: Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay
A capture-replay flaw exists when the design of the product makes it possible for a malicious user to sniff network traffic and bypass authentication by replaying it to the server in question to the same effect as the original message (or with minor changes).
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Utilize some sequence or time stamping functionality along with a checksum which takes this into account in order to ensure that messages can be parsed only once.
- Architecture and Design: Since any attacker who can listen to traffic can see sequence numbers, it is necessary to sign messages with some kind of cryptography to ensure that sequence numbers are not simply doctored along with content.
CWE-362: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')
The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: In languages that support it, use synchronization primitives. Only wrap these around critical code to minimize the impact on performance.
- Architecture and Design: Use thread-safe capabilities such as the data access abstraction in Spring.
- Architecture and Design: Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring. Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).
- Implementation: When using multithreading and operating on shared variables, only use thread-safe functions.
- Implementation: Use atomic operations on shared variables. Be wary of innocent-looking constructs such as "x++". This may appear atomic at the code layer, but it is actually non-atomic at the instruction layer, since it involves a read, followed by a computation, followed by a write.
- Implementation: Use a mutex if available, but be sure to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-412.
- Implementation: Avoid double-checked locking (CWE-609) and other implementation errors that arise when trying to avoid the overhead of synchronization.
- Implementation: Disable interrupts or signals over critical parts of the code, but also make sure that the code does not go into a large or infinite loop.
- Implementation: Use the volatile type modifier for critical variables to avoid unexpected compiler optimization or reordering. This does not necessarily solve the synchronization problem, but it can help.
- Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
CWE-367: Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition
The product checks the state of a resource before using that resource, but the resource's state can change between the check and the use in a way that invalidates the results of the check.
How to prevent it
- Implementation: The most basic advice for TOCTOU vulnerabilities is to not perform a check before the use. This does not resolve the underlying issue of the execution of a function on a resource whose state and identity cannot be assured, but it does help to limit the false sense of security given by the check.
- Implementation: When the file being altered is owned by the current user and group, set the effective gid and uid to that of the current user and group when executing this statement.
- Architecture and Design: Limit the interleaving of operations on files from multiple processes.
- Implementation, Architecture and Design: If you cannot perform operations atomically and you must share access to the resource between multiple processes or threads, then try to limit the amount of time (CPU cycles) between the check and use of the resource. This will not fix the problem, but it could make it more difficult for an attack to succeed.
- Implementation: Recheck the resource after the use call to verify that the action was taken appropriately.
- Architecture and Design: Ensure that some environmental locking mechanism can be used to protect resources effectively.
- Implementation: Ensure that locking occurs before the check, as opposed to afterwards, such that the resource, as checked, is the same as it is when in use.
CWE-613: Insufficient Session Expiration
According to WASC, "Insufficient Session Expiration is when a web site permits an attacker to reuse old session credentials or session IDs for authorization."
How to prevent it
- Implementation: Set sessions/credentials expiration date.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-r4xp-prcw-77qf better-auth: OAuth Proxy lets an attacker sign in as another user | Critical | Also affects better-auth |
| GHSA-965c-763c-88jm better-auth: OAuth state can be used as a Magic Link to sign in as another user | Critical | Also affects better-auth |
| GHSA-44jh-23m7-hpcf @better-auth/drizzle-adapter: Concurrent requests can exceed rate limits on PostgreSQL | Medium | Also affects better-auth |
| GHSA-q84f-53jg-9ppm better-auth: Device login approval does not show the requesting client or permissions | High | Also affects better-auth |
| GHSA-qq9h-g4jm-xgf3 Better Auth: Account takeover via pre-account hijacking on magic-link and email-OTP sign-in | High | Also affects better-auth |
| GHSA-2vg6-77g8-24mp Better Auth: Stale sessions persist after user deletion across admin, anonymous, and SCIM flows | Medium | Also affects better-auth |
| GHSA-7w99-5wm4-3g79 @better-auth/oauth-provider's OAuth authorization-code grant allows concurrent redemption when two token requests race the find-then-delete primitive | High | Also affects better-auth |
| GHSA-9h47-pqcx-hjr4 Better Auth has insecure cryptographic defaults in oidcProvider: alg=none advertised and plain PKCE accepted by default | Critical | Also affects better-auth |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor