github-starred/better-auth
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth.git synced 2026-05-24 16:11:53 -05:00
Code Issues 2.5k Packages Projects Releases 112 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #7999] getAccessToken overwrites refresh_token with undefined for providers that don't return it on refresh #19599

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-04-15 18:52:30 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 1 comment
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-15 18:52:30 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @async3619 on GitHub (Feb 16, 2026).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/7999

Is this suited for github?

  • Yes, this is suited for github

Describe the bug

When using getAccessToken with Google OAuth (stateless mode, storeAccountCookie: true), the refresh token gets wiped out after the first successful token refresh.

Google's token refresh endpoint (oauth2.googleapis.com/token) does not return a new refresh_token in the response — it only returns a new access_token. This is expected behavior from Google.

However, in getAccessToken handler (api/routes/account.ts), the updatedData object always includes refreshToken from the refresh response, even when it's undefined:

newTokens = await provider.refreshAccessToken(refreshToken$1);
const updatedData = {
    accessToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.accessToken, ctx.context),
    accessTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.accessTokenExpiresAt,
    refreshToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.refreshToken, ctx.context), // undefined for Google
    refreshTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt
};
// ...
if (ctx.context.options.account?.storeAccountCookie) await setAccountCookie(ctx, {
    ...account,
    ...updatedAccount ?? updatedData  // refreshToken: undefined overwrites the original
});

The spread { ...account, ...updatedData } overwrites account.refreshToken with undefined.

To Reproduce

  1. Set up Google OAuth with accessType: 'offline', storeAccountCookie: true, no database
  2. Log in — refresh token is stored in the account cookie
  3. Wait for access token to expire (~1 hour) or test with a short-lived token
  4. getAccessToken triggers refresh — succeeds, but the cookie is updated with refreshToken: undefined
  5. Next refresh attempt fails because account.refreshToken is now falsy: 
    if (account.refreshToken && accessTokenExpired && provider.refreshAccessToken) {
//  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ → false, refresh skipped

Expected behavior

The original refresh token should be preserved when the provider doesn't return a new one. Something like:

const updatedData = {
    accessToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.accessToken, ctx.context),
    accessTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.accessTokenExpiresAt,
    refreshToken: newTokens.refreshToken
        ? await setTokenUtil(newTokens.refreshToken, ctx.context)
        : account.refreshToken,  // keep the original
    refreshTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt ?? account.refreshTokenExpiresAt,
};

The same pattern exists in the refreshToken endpoint as well (same file, different handler).

Workaround

Provide a custom refreshAccessToken that explicitly returns the original refresh token:

google: {
    clientId: process.env.GOOGLE_CLIENT_ID,
    clientSecret: process.env.GOOGLE_CLIENT_SECRET,
    accessType: 'offline',
    prompt: 'consent',
    refreshAccessToken: async (refreshToken) => {
        const response = await fetch('https://oauth2.googleapis.com/token', {
            method: 'POST',
            headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/x-www-form-urlencoded' },
            body: new URLSearchParams({
                grant_type: 'refresh_token',
                refresh_token: refreshToken,
                client_id: process.env.GOOGLE_CLIENT_ID!,
                client_secret: process.env.GOOGLE_CLIENT_SECRET!,
            }),
        })
        const data = await response.json()
        return {
            accessToken: data.access_token,
            refreshToken, // preserve original
            accessTokenExpiresAt: new Date(Date.now() + data.expires_in * 1000),
        }
    },
},

Additional context

This likely affects any OAuth provider that doesn't return a new refresh token on refresh (Google, and possibly others). The built-in refreshAccessToken in oauth2/refresh-access-token.ts maps data.refresh_token directly, which is undefined when the provider omits it.

Version: better-auth 1.4.18

Originally created by @async3619 on GitHub (Feb 16, 2026). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/7999 ### Is this suited for github? - [x] Yes, this is suited for github ### Describe the bug When using `getAccessToken` with Google OAuth (stateless mode, `storeAccountCookie: true`), the refresh token gets wiped out after the first successful token refresh. Google's token refresh endpoint (`oauth2.googleapis.com/token`) does **not** return a new `refresh_token` in the response — it only returns a new `access_token`. This is expected behavior from Google. However, in `getAccessToken` handler (`api/routes/account.ts`), the `updatedData` object always includes `refreshToken` from the refresh response, even when it's `undefined`: ```ts newTokens = await provider.refreshAccessToken(refreshToken$1); const updatedData = { accessToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.accessToken, ctx.context), accessTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.accessTokenExpiresAt, refreshToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.refreshToken, ctx.context), // undefined for Google refreshTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt }; // ... if (ctx.context.options.account?.storeAccountCookie) await setAccountCookie(ctx, { ...account, ...updatedAccount ?? updatedData // refreshToken: undefined overwrites the original }); ``` The spread `{ ...account, ...updatedData }` overwrites `account.refreshToken` with `undefined`. ### To Reproduce 1. Set up Google OAuth with `accessType: 'offline'`, `storeAccountCookie: true`, no database 2. Log in — refresh token is stored in the account cookie 3. Wait for access token to expire (~1 hour) or test with a short-lived token 4. `getAccessToken` triggers refresh — succeeds, but the cookie is updated with `refreshToken: undefined` 5. Next refresh attempt fails because `account.refreshToken` is now falsy: ```ts if (account.refreshToken && accessTokenExpired && provider.refreshAccessToken) { // ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ → false, refresh skipped ``` ### Expected behavior The original refresh token should be preserved when the provider doesn't return a new one. Something like: ```ts const updatedData = { accessToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.accessToken, ctx.context), accessTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.accessTokenExpiresAt, refreshToken: newTokens.refreshToken ? await setTokenUtil(newTokens.refreshToken, ctx.context) : account.refreshToken, // keep the original refreshTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt ?? account.refreshTokenExpiresAt, }; ``` The same pattern exists in the `refreshToken` endpoint as well (same file, different handler). ### Workaround Provide a custom `refreshAccessToken` that explicitly returns the original refresh token: ```ts google: { clientId: process.env.GOOGLE_CLIENT_ID, clientSecret: process.env.GOOGLE_CLIENT_SECRET, accessType: 'offline', prompt: 'consent', refreshAccessToken: async (refreshToken) => { const response = await fetch('https://oauth2.googleapis.com/token', { method: 'POST', headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/x-www-form-urlencoded' }, body: new URLSearchParams({ grant_type: 'refresh_token', refresh_token: refreshToken, client_id: process.env.GOOGLE_CLIENT_ID!, client_secret: process.env.GOOGLE_CLIENT_SECRET!, }), }) const data = await response.json() return { accessToken: data.access_token, refreshToken, // preserve original accessTokenExpiresAt: new Date(Date.now() + data.expires_in * 1000), } }, }, ``` ### Additional context This likely affects any OAuth provider that doesn't return a new refresh token on refresh (Google, and possibly others). The built-in `refreshAccessToken` in `oauth2/refresh-access-token.ts` maps `data.refresh_token` directly, which is `undefined` when the provider omits it. **Version**: better-auth 1.4.18
GiteaMirror added the lockedbug labels 2026-04-15 18:52:30 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-15 18:52:32 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dosubot[bot] commented on GitHub (Feb 16, 2026):

Hi @async3619! I'm Dosu and I’m helping the better-auth team.

This is a confirmed bug. The getAccessToken handler always includes refreshToken in updatedData even when the provider doesn't return one, and the spread operator then overwrites the original value with undefined.

The refreshAccessToken function correctly treats refreshToken as optional (returning data.refresh_token which can be undefined), but the calling code doesn't handle this properly.

Your suggested fix is exactly right. An alternative approach using conditional spreading:

const updatedData = {
    accessToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.accessToken, ctx.context),
    accessTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.accessTokenExpiresAt,
    ...(newTokens.refreshToken !== undefined && {
        refreshToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.refreshToken, ctx.context),
    }),
    ...(newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt !== undefined && {
        refreshTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt,
    }),
};

This affects any provider that doesn't return new refresh tokens on refresh—Google being the most common example. Your workaround with a custom refreshAccessToken that preserves the original token is the correct approach until this is fixed.

To reply, just mention @dosu.

How did I do? Good | Irrelevant | Incorrect | Verbose | Hallucination | Report 🐛 | Other

Chat with Dosu Open in Cursor Join Discord Share on X

<!-- gh-comment-id:3909981726 --> @dosubot[bot] commented on GitHub (Feb 16, 2026): <!-- Greeting --> Hi @async3619! I'm [Dosu](https://go.dosu.dev/dosubot) and I’m helping the better-auth team. <!-- Answer --> This is a confirmed bug. The [getAccessToken handler](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/blob/d3b579e42a707a9037a9210ad14611366b745d2a/packages/better-auth/src/api/routes/account.ts#L565-L577) always includes `refreshToken` in `updatedData` even when the provider doesn't return one, and the spread operator then overwrites the original value with `undefined`. The [refreshAccessToken function](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/blob/d3b579e42a707a9037a9210ad14611366b745d2a/packages/core/src/oauth2/refresh-access-token.ts#L108-L121) correctly treats `refreshToken` as optional (returning `data.refresh_token` which can be undefined), but the calling code doesn't handle this properly. Your suggested fix is exactly right. An alternative approach using conditional spreading: ```ts const updatedData = { accessToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.accessToken, ctx.context), accessTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.accessTokenExpiresAt, ...(newTokens.refreshToken !== undefined && { refreshToken: await setTokenUtil(newTokens.refreshToken, ctx.context), }), ...(newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt !== undefined && { refreshTokenExpiresAt: newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt, }), }; ``` This affects any provider that doesn't return new refresh tokens on refresh—Google being the most common example. Your workaround with a custom `refreshAccessToken` that preserves the original token is the correct approach until this is fixed. <!-- 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/e5986f06-b2d1-4caf-940a-b0788d183b60?feedback_type=great_response) | [Irrelevant](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/e5986f06-b2d1-4caf-940a-b0788d183b60?feedback_type=irrelevant_answer) | [Incorrect](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/e5986f06-b2d1-4caf-940a-b0788d183b60?feedback_type=incorrect_sources) | [Verbose](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/e5986f06-b2d1-4caf-940a-b0788d183b60?feedback_type=too_verbose) | [Hallucination](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/e5986f06-b2d1-4caf-940a-b0788d183b60?feedback_type=hallucination) | [Report 🐛](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/e5986f06-b2d1-4caf-940a-b0788d183b60?feedback_type=bug_report) | [Other](https://app.dosu.dev/response-feedback/e5986f06-b2d1-4caf-940a-b0788d183b60?feedback_type=other)</sup> [![Chat with Dosu](https://dosu.dev/dosu-chat-badge.svg)](https://app.dosu.dev/cdda13d9-dd27-4d31-b09a-5d8bec92de21/ask?utm_source=github)&nbsp;[![Open in Cursor](https://dosu.dev/dosu-in-cursor.svg)](https://cursor.com/link/prompt?text=This%20is%20a%20confirmed%20bug.%20The%20%5BgetAccessToken%20handler%5D%28https%3A//github.com/better-auth/better-auth/blob/d3b579e42a707a9037a9210ad14611366b745d2a/packages/better-auth/src/api/routes/account.ts%23L565-L577%29%20always%20includes%20%60refreshToken%60%20in%20%60updatedData%60%20even%20when%20the%20provider%20doesn%27t%20return%20one%2C%20and%20the%20spread%20operator%20then%20overwrites%20the%20original%20value%20with%20%60undefined%60.%0A%0AThe%20%5BrefreshAccessToken%20function%5D%28https%3A//github.com/better-auth/better-auth/blob/d3b579e42a707a9037a9210ad14611366b745d2a/packages/core/src/oauth2/refresh-access-token.ts%23L108-L121%29%20correctly%20treats%20%60refreshToken%60%20as%20optional%20%28returning%20%60data.refresh_token%60%20which%20can%20be%20undefined%29%2C%20but%20the%20calling%20code%20doesn%27t%20handle%20this%20properly.%0A%0AYour%20suggested%20fix%20is%20exactly%20right.%20An%20alternative%20approach%20using%20conditional%20spreading%3A%0A%0A%60%60%60ts%0Aconst%20updatedData%20%3D%20%7B%0A%20%20%20%20accessToken%3A%20await%20setTokenUtil%28newTokens.accessToken%2C%20ctx.context%29%2C%0A%20%20%20%20accessTokenExpiresAt%3A%20newTokens.accessTokenExpiresAt%2C%0A%20%20%20%20...%28newTokens.refreshToken%20%21%3D%3D%20undefined%20%26%26%20%7B%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20refreshToken%3A%20await%20setTokenUtil%28newTokens.refreshToken%2C%20ctx.context%29%2C%0A%20%20%20%20%7D%29%2C%0A%20%20%20%20...%28newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt%20%21%3D%3D%20undefined%20%26%26%20%7B%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20refreshTokenExpiresAt%3A%20newTokens.refreshTokenExpiresAt%2C%0A%20%20%20%20%7D%29%2C%0A%7D%3B%0A%60%60%60%0A%0AThis%20affects%20any%20provider%20that%20doesn%27t%20return%20new%20refresh%20tokens%20on%20refresh%E2%80%94Google%20being%20the%20most%20common%20example.%20Your%20workaround%20with%20a%20custom%20%60refreshAccessToken%60%20that%20preserves%20the%20original%20token%20is%20the%20correct%20approach%20until%20this%20is%20fixed.)&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/7999)
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 locked
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#19599
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?