github-starred/better-auth
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth.git synced 2026-05-23 07:18:56 -05:00
Code Issues 2.5k Packages Projects Releases 112 Wiki Activity

allowDifferentEmails is not respected #1875

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-03-13 09:10:08 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 1 comment
GiteaMirror commented 2026-03-13 09:10:08 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @michalwerner on GitHub (Sep 7, 2025).

Is this suited for github?

  • Yes, this is suited for github

To Reproduce

When manually connecting social account by e.g.:

await authClient.linkSocial({
  provider: "google",
});

it's possible to connect account with different email despite allowDifferentEmails is set to false.

This is most likely because check for that is inside if (c.body.idToken) block which effectively skips this check for the flow without idToken.

I can prepare a PR to fix that, but first I'd like to ask if this is maybe intentional for some reason.

Current vs. Expected behavior

Current: allowDifferentEmails is NOT respected in social account linking without idToken

Expected: allowDifferentEmails IS respected in social account linking without idToken

What version of Better Auth are you using?

1.3.8

System info

{
  "system": {
    "platform": "darwin",
    "arch": "arm64",
    "version": "Darwin Kernel Version 24.5.0: Tue Apr 22 19:54:49 PDT 2025; root:xnu-11417.121.6~2/RELEASE_ARM64_T6000",
    "release": "24.5.0",
    "cpuCount": 10,
    "cpuModel": "Apple M1 Pro",
    "totalMemory": "16.00 GB",
    "freeMemory": "0.11 GB"
  },
  "node": {
    "version": "v22.18.0",
    "env": "development"
  },
  "packageManager": {
    "name": "pnpm",
    "version": "9.13.2"
  },
  "frameworks": null,
  "databases": null,
  "betterAuth": {
    "version": "Unknown",
    "config": null,
    "error": "ENOENT: no such file or directory, open 'package.json'"
  }
}

Which area(s) are affected? (Select all that apply)

Backend, Client, Documentation

Auth config (if applicable)

{
  socialProviders: {
    google: {
      prompt: "select_account",
      clientId: process.env.BETTER_AUTH_GOOGLE_CLIENT_ID!,
      clientSecret: process.env.BETTER_AUTH_GOOGLE_CLIENT_SECRET,
      mapProfileToUser: (profile) => ({
        firstName: profile.given_name,
        lastName: profile.family_name,
      }),
    },
  },
  account: {
    encryptOAuthTokens: true,
    updateAccountOnSignIn: true,
    accountLinking: {
      enabled: true,
      allowDifferentEmails: false,
    },
  },
}

Additional context

No response

Originally created by @michalwerner on GitHub (Sep 7, 2025). ### Is this suited for github? - [x] Yes, this is suited for github ### To Reproduce When manually connecting social account by e.g.: ```ts await authClient.linkSocial({ provider: "google", }); ``` it's possible to connect account with different email despite `allowDifferentEmails` is set to `false`. This is most likely because [check for that](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/blob/9829c4dea2536bdc9396b3ee9a8ae7d5273944f8/packages/better-auth/src/api/routes/account.ts#L299) is inside [`if (c.body.idToken)` block](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/blob/9829c4dea2536bdc9396b3ee9a8ae7d5273944f8/packages/better-auth/src/api/routes/account.ts#L220C3-L220C24) which effectively skips this check for the flow without `idToken`. I can prepare a PR to fix that, but first I'd like to ask if this is maybe intentional for some reason. ### Current vs. Expected behavior Current: `allowDifferentEmails` is NOT respected in social account linking without `idToken` Expected: `allowDifferentEmails` IS respected in social account linking without `idToken` ### What version of Better Auth are you using? 1.3.8 ### System info ```bash { "system": { "platform": "darwin", "arch": "arm64", "version": "Darwin Kernel Version 24.5.0: Tue Apr 22 19:54:49 PDT 2025; root:xnu-11417.121.6~2/RELEASE_ARM64_T6000", "release": "24.5.0", "cpuCount": 10, "cpuModel": "Apple M1 Pro", "totalMemory": "16.00 GB", "freeMemory": "0.11 GB" }, "node": { "version": "v22.18.0", "env": "development" }, "packageManager": { "name": "pnpm", "version": "9.13.2" }, "frameworks": null, "databases": null, "betterAuth": { "version": "Unknown", "config": null, "error": "ENOENT: no such file or directory, open 'package.json'" } } ``` ### Which area(s) are affected? (Select all that apply) Backend, Client, Documentation ### Auth config (if applicable) ```typescript { socialProviders: { google: { prompt: "select_account", clientId: process.env.BETTER_AUTH_GOOGLE_CLIENT_ID!, clientSecret: process.env.BETTER_AUTH_GOOGLE_CLIENT_SECRET, mapProfileToUser: (profile) => ({ firstName: profile.given_name, lastName: profile.family_name, }), }, }, account: { encryptOAuthTokens: true, updateAccountOnSignIn: true, accountLinking: { enabled: true, allowDifferentEmails: false, }, }, } ``` ### Additional context _No response_
GiteaMirror added the bug label 2026-03-13 09:10:08 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-03-13 09:10:09 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dosubot[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 7, 2025):

Hi @michalwerner! I'm Dosu and I’m helping the better-auth team.

You're correct—right now, the allowDifferentEmails check is only enforced inside the if (c.body.idToken) block in the backend, so if idToken isn't present, the check is skipped and users can link accounts with different emails even if allowDifferentEmails is false. There's no comment or code suggesting this is intentional, and I couldn't find any documentation or prior discussion explaining this behavior. It looks like an oversight rather than a deliberate design choice, so proposing a PR to enforce allowDifferentEmails consistently across all social linking flows would be appropriate. You can see the relevant code and logic here: account.ts implementation.

To reply, just mention @dosu.

How did I do? Good | Irrelevant | Incorrect | Verbose | Hallucination | Report 🐛 | Other  Chat with Dosu Join Discord Share on X

@dosubot[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 7, 2025): <!-- Greeting --> Hi @michalwerner! I'm [Dosu](https://go.dosu.dev/dosubot) and I’m helping the better-auth team. <!-- Answer --> You're correct—right now, the allowDifferentEmails check is only enforced inside the if (c.body.idToken) block in the backend, so if idToken isn't present, the check is skipped and users can link accounts with different emails even if allowDifferentEmails is false. There's no comment or code suggesting this is intentional, and I couldn't find any documentation or prior discussion explaining this behavior. It looks like an oversight rather than a deliberate design choice, so proposing a PR to enforce allowDifferentEmails consistently across all social linking flows would be appropriate. You can see the relevant code and logic here: [account.ts implementation](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/blob/a7eaa049e448464ad8501f46136048091a072f43/packages/better-auth/src/api/routes/account.ts). <!-- Dosu Comment Footer --> *To reply, just mention [@dosu](https://go.dosu.dev/dosubot).* --- <sup>How did I do? [Good](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/2ca61668-0340-4935-9e5b-f162ee0d3214?feedback_type=great_response) | [Irrelevant](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/2ca61668-0340-4935-9e5b-f162ee0d3214?feedback_type=irrelevant_answer) | [Incorrect](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/2ca61668-0340-4935-9e5b-f162ee0d3214?feedback_type=incorrect_sources) | [Verbose](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/2ca61668-0340-4935-9e5b-f162ee0d3214?feedback_type=too_verbose) | [Hallucination](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/2ca61668-0340-4935-9e5b-f162ee0d3214?feedback_type=hallucination) | [Report 🐛](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/2ca61668-0340-4935-9e5b-f162ee0d3214?feedback_type=bug_report) | [Other](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/2ca61668-0340-4935-9e5b-f162ee0d3214?feedback_type=other)</sup>&nbsp;&nbsp;[![Chat with Dosu](https://dosu.dev/dosu-chat-badge.svg)](https://app.dosu.dev/cdda13d9-dd27-4d31-b09a-5d8bec92de21/ask?utm_source=github)&nbsp;[![Join Discord](https://img.shields.io/badge/join-5865F2?logo=discord&logoColor=white&label=)](https://go.dosu.dev/discord-bot)&nbsp;[![Share on X](https://img.shields.io/badge/X-share-black)](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=%40dosu_ai%20helped%20me%20solve%20this%20issue!&url=https%3A//github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/4503)
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
adapter
astro
awaiting external contributor
blocked
breaking
breaking change
bug
c-devops
core
credentials
database
dependencies
devops
devtools
docs
documentation
duplicate
elysia
enhancement
enterprise
expo
express
fastify
good first issue
help wanted
hono
identity
infra
integration
invalid
javascript
locked
maintenance
need-more-information
needs: info
needs: repro
nextjs
nuxt
oauth
organization
P0
payments
perf
platform
plugin
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
ready
regression
remix
security
social-provider
solid
stale
svelte
tanstack-start
tracking
version-bump
vue
wontfix
No Label bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/better-auth#1875
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?