CVE-2026-53514: Better auth Better Auth Vulnerable To Unauthorized Vulnerability
HIGHCVE-2026-53514 is a HIGH (CVSS 7.7) better auth vulnerable to unauthorized vulnerability (CWE-441: Unintended Proxy or Intermediary ('Confused Deputy')) affecting Better auth libraries in the npm ecosystem. The issue involves better auth vulnerable to unauthorized invitation acceptance via unverified email match in organization plugin. Remediation is available by upgrading affected packages to version 1.6.11.
CVE-2026-53514 at a Glance
Security Impact
CVSS: 7.7
The security impact metrics below are parsed directly from the CVSS v3.1 vector string (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N).
How to Fix CVE-2026-53514
To remediate this vulnerability, upgrade all affected Better auth dependencies to a patched release. Both direct and transitive dependencies should be checked, as frameworks or security libraries may pull in vulnerable versions transitively.
npm install better-auth@1.6.11
Run the following command in your project directory to verify that all resolved dependencies use the patched release:
npm ls better-auth
How to Check if You Are Affected
To determine whether your Node.js application is affected by CVE-2026-53514, inspect your project dependencies using npm:
npm ls better-auth
Analyze the terminal output to locate any version of Better auth in your dependency tree. If any resolved version matches the vulnerable ranges listed in the table below (for example, versions earlier than 1.6.11), your application is affected.
Note: The npm ls better-auth command inspects dependencies declared in your package.json and lockfile; it does not perform automated runtime dynamic scanning.
Technical Details
Vulnerability Mechanism & Technical Analysis
This vulnerability is classified under CWE-441: Unintended Proxy or Intermediary ('Confused Deputy'), where the product receives a request, message, or directive from an upstream component, but the product does not sufficiently preserve the original source of the request before forwarding the request to an external actor that is outside of the product's control sphere. this causes the product to appear to be the source of the request, leading it to act as a proxy or other intermediary between the upstream component and the external actor. In Better auth, software state validation or input boundaries are circumvented during processing. Review the official source advisory statement below for specific affected components, classes, and reproduction details.
Source Advisory Statement
CVE-2026-53514 Affected Better auth Versions
1 component(s)| Product / Package | Ecosystem | Affected Versions | Fixed Version |
|---|---|---|---|
|
better-auth
|
npm |
< 1.6.11
|
1.6.11
|
References
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-53514?
Which Better auth versions are affected?
What version fixes CVE-2026-53514?
Is better-auth affected?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-53514?
What CWE is associated with CVE-2026-53514?
How can I check npm dependencies for CVE-2026-53514?
Machine-readable OSV JSON
OSV v1.5 Schema
{
"schema_version" : "1.4.0",
"id" : "GHSA-fmh4-wcc4-5jm3",
"modified" : "2026-07-20T19:24:41Z",
"published" : "2026-07-07T20:54:51Z",
"aliases" : [ "CVE-2026-53514" ],
"summary" : "Better Auth vulnerable to unauthorized invitation acceptance via unverified email match in organization plugin",
"details" : "### Am I affected?\n\nUsers are affected if all of the following are true:\n\n- Their application uses `better-auth` with the `organization` plugin (`import { organization } from \"better-auth/plugins/organization\"`).\n- Their application enables a sign-up surface that allows arbitrary unverified email registration. Most commonly `emailAndPassword: { enabled: true }` without `requireEmailVerification: true`.\n- Their application has not set `requireEmailVerificationOnInvitation: true` on the `organization()` options.\n- Their application invitation distribution flow allows anyone other than the invited mailbox owner to obtain the `invitationId`. Examples: admin UI surfacing the link, copy-paste into chat, forwarded email, mail-forwarding rules at the recipient's domain, link previews logging the URL, or a custom `sendInvitationEmail` integration that sends to a non-owner channel.\n\nIf their application set `emailAndPassword: { enabled: true, requireEmailVerification: true }` so unverified rows cannot reach a usable session, they are not affected. Setting `requireEmailVerificationOnInvitation: true` closes `acceptInvitation` and `rejectInvitation`, but `getInvitation` and `listUserInvitations` remain ungated even with that flag.\n\nFix:\n\n1. Upgrade to `better-auth@1.6.11` or later.\n2. If developers cannot upgrade their application, see workarounds below.\n\n### Summary\n\nThe organization plugin's `acceptInvitation` endpoint trusts an email-string equality check as proof that the session user owns the invited address. With Better Auth's stock `emailAndPassword: { enabled: true }` configuration, `requireEmailVerification` defaults to `false`, so an attacker can sign up a row keyed to `victim@target.example` (auto-signed-in, `emailVerified: false`) before the legitimate owner. When an organization admin invites that address, the attacker presents the `invitationId` and accepts the invitation, joining the organization at the invited role.\n\n### Details\n\nThe recipient gate compares `invitation.email.toLowerCase()` to `session.user.email.toLowerCase()` and returns 403 on mismatch. The opt-in `requireEmailVerificationOnInvitation` flag adds an `emailVerified` check, but it defaults to `false` and only fires on `acceptInvitation` and `rejectInvitation`; `getInvitation` and `listUserInvitations` have no `emailVerified` gate at all.\n\nThe bearer token (`invitationId`) is by default 32 chars over `[a-zA-Z0-9]` (~190 bits), so the realistic attack vector is leakage of the invitation link rather than brute force.\n\nThe fix shape defaults the `emailVerified` gate to on and extends it across all four invitation endpoints (`acceptInvitation`, `rejectInvitation`, `getInvitation`, `listUserInvitations`). This is the same trust-primitive class as GHSA-g38m-r43w-p2q7 (OAuth auto-link); both ship the rule \"email equality is not ownership proof; both sides must prove ownership\".\n\n### Patches\n\nFixed in `better-auth@1.6.11`. All four invitation recipient endpoints (`acceptInvitation`, `rejectInvitation`, `getInvitation`, `listUserInvitations`) now require the session user's `emailVerified` to be `true` in addition to the email-string match. The `requireEmailVerificationOnInvitation` option default flips from `false` to `true`, so applications are secure out of the box.\n\n`getInvitation` and `listUserInvitations` use the new `EMAIL_VERIFICATION_REQUIRED_FOR_INVITATION` error code so the wording matches the operation; `acceptInvitation` and `rejectInvitation` keep the existing `EMAIL_VERIFICATION_REQUIRED_BEFORE_ACCEPTING_OR_REJECTING_INVITATION` code. Server-side calls to `listUserInvitations` that pass `ctx.query.email` without an authenticated session continue to bypass the gate; the gate is specific to session-authenticated recipient calls.\n\nIntegrators who intentionally accept invitations on unverified sessions can preserve the legacy permissive behavior with `organization({ requireEmailVerificationOnInvitation: false })`. The option is marked `@deprecated`; the gate at each call site carries a `FIXME` pointing at the next-minor follow-up that drops the option and makes the check unconditional. Operators that take this opt-out should understand the takeover risk before doing so.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nIf developers cannot upgrade their applications immediately:\n\n- **Set `organization({ requireEmailVerificationOnInvitation: true })`**. Closes `acceptInvitation` and `rejectInvitation` against unverified sessions. Does not close `getInvitation` or `listUserInvitations`.\n- **Set `emailAndPassword.requireEmailVerification: true`** (or remove email/password sign-up entirely). Closes the pre-registration step itself.\n- **Layer middleware** on the organization invitation routes that asserts `session.user.emailVerified === true` and rejects otherwise.\n\n### Impact\n\n- **Account takeover via pre-account hijacking on the org invitation surface**: the attacker, holding only an unverified self-issued session and the leaked `invitationId`, joins the organization as a member at the invited role.\n- **Organization membership reach**: the attacker reads invitation contents and any organization-scoped data the joined role can see, and acts as a member of the victim organization.\n\n### Credit\n\nReported by @widavies.\n\n### Resources\n\n- [CWE-287: Improper Authentication](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/287.html)\n- [CWE-345: Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/345.html)\n- [CWE-862: Missing Authorization](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/862.html)\n- [CWE-441: Unintended Proxy or Intermediary](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/441.html)",
"severity" : [ {
"type" : "CVSS_V3",
"score" : "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N"
} ],
"affected" : [ {
"package" : {
"ecosystem" : "npm",
"name" : "better-auth"
},
"ranges" : [ {
"type" : "ECOSYSTEM",
"events" : [ {
"introduced" : "0"
}, {
"fixed" : "1.6.11"
} ]
} ]
} ],
"references" : [ {
"type" : "WEB",
"url" : "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/security/advisories/GHSA-fmh4-wcc4-5jm3"
}, {
"type" : "ADVISORY",
"url" : "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-53514"
}, {
"type" : "WEB",
"url" : "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/pull/9577"
}, {
"type" : "WEB",
"url" : "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/commit/23094a628f007f801be6d26e5b15dc5fc6fc4eb8"
}, {
"type" : "PACKAGE",
"url" : "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth"
}, {
"type" : "WEB",
"url" : "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/releases/tag/v1.6.11"
} ],
"database_specific" : {
"cwe_ids" : [ "CWE-287", "CWE-345", "CWE-441", "CWE-862" ],
"severity" : "HIGH",
"github_reviewed" : true,
"github_reviewed_at" : "2026-07-07T20:54:51Z",
"nvd_published_at" : "2026-07-15T18:16:47Z"
}
}