Files
accounted/lib/auth/__tests__/email-change-claim.pg.test.ts
T
MattssonandClaude Fable 5.1 828628d882 fix(auth): land stock email-change links on the status page and stop retries voiding pending mails (#2199)
* fix(auth): land stock email-change links on the status page and stop retries voiding pending mails

A secure email change needs one click in each mailbox. Stock GoTrue links
verify on the GoTrue host and return to /auth/callback through redirect_to
with ?message= (first click), ?error= (dead link) or ?code= (completing
click); none carries a token_hash, so the callback bounced every one of
them to /login with no message. Users read that as a failure and pressed
"Byt" again, and because the claims fast path carries no new_email, the
route re-issued both tokens on every press and voided the links they were
about to click.

- /api/account/email stamps flow=email_change on emailRedirectTo and reads
  pending state from GoTrue when the session claims lack it, so a repeat
  request inside the 30-minute window is a no-op instead of a re-send.
- /auth/callback routes flow=email_change redirects to
  /auth/email-change?status=partial|done|failed; hook-style token_hash
  links keep using the existing verifyOtp branch.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LMFybWJqw8vScQiEDwKXGi

* fix(auth): let signed-in stock email-change redirects through the proxy and treat a minted code as done

Skeptic findings on e5639fb43:

- The proxy bounced authenticated /auth/callback requests to / unless they
  carried type=email_change. Stock GoTrue links return with only the
  flow=email_change marker, so the new status branch was unreachable from
  the signed-in browser the change usually starts in. Exempt the marker too.
- A completing click opened in a browser without the PKCE verifier (phone
  mail app) failed the code exchange and, with no session to inspect, was
  reported as a failed change although GoTrue had already flipped the
  address. A code is only minted after that verify, so report done.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LMFybWJqw8vScQiEDwKXGi

* fix(auth): gate email-change requests with an atomic per-user claim

CodeRabbit on PR #2199: the pending-state read from GoTrue is not atomic,
so two concurrent POST /api/account/email calls (two tabs, a retried
fetch) could both see nothing pending and both re-issue the confirmation
tokens, voiding each other's mails.

Migration 20260903083000 adds email_change_requests (one row per auth
user, RLS with no policies) and two SECURITY DEFINER RPCs:
claim_email_change_request(p_email, p_window_seconds) is a single
INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE whose row lock serialises concurrent
claimers, so exactly one caller per address per window wins; a different
address always wins; release_email_change_request drops the claim when
GoTrue refuses the change so the user can retry.

The route claims right before updateUser, answers resent:false when the
claim is held, releases on GoTrue failure, and falls through to GoTrue if
the RPC itself errors. pg-real test covers sequential, windowed,
concurrent, per-user, release and RLS behaviour. Applied to staging with
the same version.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LMFybWJqw8vScQiEDwKXGi

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-03 10:55:12 +02:00

177 lines
6.3 KiB
TypeScript

import { describe, expect, it } from 'vitest'
import { getClient, getPool } from '@/tests/pg/setup'
import { insertAuthUser } from '@/tests/pg/fixtures'
// claim_email_change_request / release_email_change_request
// (20260903083000_email_change_request_claims.sql): the cross-instance gate
// in front of GoTrue's updateUser in POST /api/account/email. Exactly one
// caller per user, address and window may proceed; the rest must answer
// "already pending" without re-issuing confirmation tokens.
//
// withUserContext rolls its transaction back, which would hide the claim
// from the next call. These helpers commit instead, because the claim's
// whole point is what a SECOND transaction sees; the test users are fresh
// per test and their rows cascade away with them.
const WINDOW = 30 * 60
async function asUser<T>(
userId: string,
fn: (client: import('pg').PoolClient) => Promise<T>,
): Promise<T> {
const client = await getClient()
try {
await client.query('BEGIN')
await client.query(`SELECT set_config('request.jwt.claims', $1, true)`, [
JSON.stringify({ sub: userId, role: 'authenticated' }),
])
await client.query(`SELECT set_config('request.jwt.claim.sub', $1, true)`, [userId])
await client.query(`SET LOCAL ROLE authenticated`)
const result = await fn(client)
await client.query('COMMIT')
return result
} catch (err) {
await client.query('ROLLBACK').catch(() => {})
throw err
} finally {
client.release()
}
}
async function claim(userId: string, email: string, window = WINDOW): Promise<boolean> {
return asUser(userId, async (client) => {
const { rows } = await client.query<{ claim_email_change_request: boolean }>(
`SELECT public.claim_email_change_request($1, $2)`,
[email, window],
)
return rows[0]!.claim_email_change_request
})
}
async function release(userId: string): Promise<void> {
await asUser(userId, async (client) => {
await client.query(`SELECT public.release_email_change_request()`)
})
}
async function backdateClaim(userId: string, seconds: number): Promise<void> {
await getPool().query(
`UPDATE public.email_change_requests
SET claimed_at = now() - make_interval(secs => $2)
WHERE user_id = $1`,
[userId, seconds],
)
}
describe('claim_email_change_request', () => {
it('grants the first claim and refuses a repeat for the same address inside the window', async () => {
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
expect(await claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
expect(await claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example')).toBe(false)
// Case and whitespace are not a different address.
expect(await claim(userId, ' New@Testbrand.example ')).toBe(false)
})
it('grants a claim for a different address while one is held', async () => {
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
expect(await claim(userId, 'first@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
expect(await claim(userId, 'second@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
// ... and the first address is now the "different" one again.
expect(await claim(userId, 'first@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
})
it('grants a repeat once the held claim is older than the window', async () => {
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
expect(await claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
await backdateClaim(userId, WINDOW + 5)
expect(await claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
expect(await claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example')).toBe(false)
})
it('lets exactly one of three concurrent claimers through', async () => {
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
const results = await Promise.all([
claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example'),
claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example'),
claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example'),
])
expect(results.filter(Boolean)).toHaveLength(1)
})
it('keeps claims per user', async () => {
const a = await insertAuthUser()
const b = await insertAuthUser()
expect(await claim(a, 'shared@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
expect(await claim(b, 'shared@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
})
it('release drops the claim so the same address can be requested again', async () => {
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
expect(await claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
await release(userId)
expect(await claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
})
it('release only touches the caller', async () => {
const a = await insertAuthUser()
const b = await insertAuthUser()
expect(await claim(a, 'a@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
expect(await claim(b, 'b@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
await release(a)
expect(await claim(b, 'b@testbrand.example')).toBe(false)
})
it('rejects an empty address and a non-positive window', async () => {
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
await expect(claim(userId, ' ')).rejects.toThrow(/requires an address/)
await expect(claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example', 0)).rejects.toThrow(
/positive window/,
)
})
it('refuses unauthenticated callers', async () => {
await expect(
getPool().query(`SELECT public.claim_email_change_request('x@testbrand.example', 60)`),
).rejects.toThrow(/authenticated user/)
await expect(
getPool().query(`SELECT public.release_email_change_request()`),
).rejects.toThrow(/authenticated user/)
})
it('is not readable or writable directly by an authenticated user', async () => {
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
expect(await claim(userId, 'new@testbrand.example')).toBe(true)
const visible = await asUser(userId, async (client) => {
const { rows } = await client.query(`SELECT * FROM public.email_change_requests`)
return rows.length
})
expect(visible).toBe(0)
await expect(
asUser(userId, async (client) => {
await client.query(`DELETE FROM public.email_change_requests`)
const { rows } = await client.query(
`SELECT count(*)::int AS n FROM public.email_change_requests`,
)
return rows[0]
}),
).resolves.toBeDefined()
// RLS with no policies: the DELETE above matched nothing.
const { rows } = await getPool().query<{ n: number }>(
`SELECT count(*)::int AS n FROM public.email_change_requests WHERE user_id = $1`,
[userId],
)
expect(rows[0]!.n).toBe(1)
})
})