fix(auth): enforce the verified-email uniqueness that email login assumes

The design has claimed since migration 0010 that at most one account can hold
a PROVEN email address, with ErrEmailTaken as the 409 a second verifier sees.
Neither half ever shipped: no migration created users_verified_email_unique,
and VerifyEmailOTP had no guard at all — the sentinel was defined but never
returned, so two accounts could both verify one address. The damage is not
cosmetic: the pre-session login resolves accounts BY verified email, so the
duplicate decided which identity a mailed sign-in code belonged to.

- Migration 0020 creates the partial unique index (lower(email) WHERE
  email_verified) the comments have been citing — the database-level backstop.
- VerifyEmailOTP now refuses the take-over with ErrEmailTaken BEFORE consuming
  the code (the address, not the code, is the problem), charges no attempt,
  and maps a lost cross-user race (unique violation) to the same answer.
- The verify handler answers 409 email_taken instead of a generic 500.

Covered by the pgint suite (sequential double-verify refused with the code
still live, a direct duplicate write still loses to the index, the refused
account can still prove its own address) and a hermetic 409 case.
This commit is contained in:
Lemon-miaow committed 2026-09-23 03:19:35 +08:00
1 parent 2a55a0d265
commit b6ef27cd2d
8 files changed
+120 -7

No files matched your search

+7
View File
@@ -354,6 +354,13 @@ func (f *fakeRepo) VerifyEmailOTP(_ context.Context, userID, purpose, codeHash s
live.attempts++ // a typo costs an attempt but does not consume the code
return "", ErrOTPInvalid
}
// A DIFFERENT verified holder of the same address → ErrEmailTaken, code left
// live — mirrors PGRepo's guard + the users_verified_email_unique index.
for _, u := range f.staff {
if u.ID != userID && u.EmailVerified && strings.EqualFold(u.Email, live.email) {
return "", ErrEmailTaken
}
}
live.consumed = true
for _, u := range f.staff { // flip the user row verified (UPDATE users ...)
if u.ID == userID {
+2 -1
View File
@@ -51,7 +51,8 @@ var (
// the handler answers 403 (wrong door) rather than 409 (already linked).
ErrPlayerBindForbidden = errors.New("bind code belongs to a staff account")
// ErrEmailTaken means a verified email would collide with another account's
// already-verified address (spec §B email-first login foundation, migration 0010).
// already-verified address (spec §B email-first login foundation; the
// users_verified_email_unique index ships in migration 0020).
// VerifyEmailOTP returns it — WITHOUT consuming the code, since the address, not
// the code, is the problem — when a DIFFERENT user has already proven the same
// address case-insensitively. It is the clean, application-level counterpart of
+9 -3
View File
@@ -187,9 +187,11 @@ type emailOTPVerifyRequest struct {
// handleEmailOTPVerify redeems a code for the caller (spec §B2, external app face).
// Outcomes mirror the link-verify shape: an invalid/expired/mismatched code → 400
// invalid_code, a locked code (too many wrong guesses) → 429 otp_locked, and on
// success the user's email is written and email_verified flips true. The verified
// address is echoed so the panel can render it.
// invalid_code, a locked code (too many wrong guesses) → 429 otp_locked, an address
// another account already proved → 409 email_taken (the code stays live — the
// address, not the code, is the problem), and on success the user's email is
// written and email_verified flips true. The verified address is echoed so the
// panel can render it.
func (a *API) handleEmailOTPVerify(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
p := principalFromContext(r.Context())
var req emailOTPVerifyRequest
@@ -211,6 +213,10 @@ func (a *API) handleEmailOTPVerify(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
case errors.Is(err, ErrOTPInvalid):
writeError(w, r, newError(http.StatusBadRequest, "invalid_code", "email code is invalid or expired"))
return
case errors.Is(err, ErrEmailTaken):
writeError(w, r, newError(http.StatusConflict, "email_taken",
"that email is already verified on another account; sign in with it or use another address"))
return
case err != nil:
writeError(w, r, err)
return
+14
View File
@@ -339,6 +339,20 @@ func TestEmailOTPVerifyRejections(t *testing.T) {
t.Fatalf("code = %d body %s, want 429 otp_locked", w.Code, w.Body.String())
}
})
t.Run("address proven elsewhere -> 409 email_taken, not consumed", func(t *testing.T) {
repo := newFakeRepo()
live(repo, "tk", otpCodeHash("123456"), time.Unix(1_700_000_600, 0), 0)
// Another account already proved the same address: login resolves accounts
// BY verified email, so the second proof must be refused.
repo.staff["other"] = &StaffUser{ID: "u2", Email: "[email protected]", EmailVerified: true}
w := do(mk(repo), "POST", "/api/v1/account/email/verify", `{"code":"123456"}`, nil)
if w.Code != http.StatusConflict || decodeErr(t, w) != "email_taken" {
t.Fatalf("code = %d body %s, want 409 email_taken", w.Code, w.Body.String())
}
if repo.otps["tk"].consumed {
t.Error("a taken address must not consume the code")
}
})
}
// TestEmailOTPBruteForceLockout drives the lockout end-to-end through the handler:
+26 -1
View File
@@ -695,7 +695,9 @@ func (p *PGRepo) CreateEmailOTP(ctx context.Context, id, userID, email, codeHash
// never silently accepted, and a hash mismatch costs an attempt (UPDATE attempts+1)
// without consuming the code — a typo must not burn a still-valid code. On a match
// the code is consumed and the user row is flipped verified, returning the proven
// address. ErrOTPInvalid / ErrOTPLocked are the only domain errors.
// address — unless a DIFFERENT account already proved the same address, which is
// ErrEmailTaken with the code left unconsumed (the address, not the guess, is the
// problem). ErrOTPInvalid / ErrOTPLocked / ErrEmailTaken are the only domain errors.
func (p *PGRepo) VerifyEmailOTP(ctx context.Context, userID, purpose, codeHash string, now time.Time) (string, error) {
tx, err := p.db.BeginTx(ctx, nil)
if err != nil {
@@ -738,12 +740,35 @@ func (p *PGRepo) VerifyEmailOTP(ctx context.Context, userID, purpose, codeHash s
return "", ErrOTPInvalid
}
// A DIFFERENT account may not also prove this address: the pre-session login
// door resolves accounts BY verified email (UserByEmail), so a second verified
// holder would make the identity ambiguous. The code is NOT consumed and no
// attempt is charged — the address, not the guess, is the problem. The check is
// the application-level counterpart of the users_verified_email_unique index
// (migration 0020), which catches a cross-user race that passes this SELECT.
var taken bool
if err := tx.QueryRowContext(ctx,
`SELECT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM users
WHERE lower(email) = lower($1) AND email_verified = true AND id <> $2)`,
email, userID).Scan(&taken); err != nil {
return "", fmt.Errorf("check verified-email uniqueness: %w", err)
}
if taken {
return "", ErrEmailTaken
}
if _, err := tx.ExecContext(ctx,
`UPDATE email_otps SET consumed_at = $2 WHERE id = $1`, id, now); err != nil {
return "", fmt.Errorf("consume otp: %w", err)
}
if _, err := tx.ExecContext(ctx,
`UPDATE users SET email = $2, email_verified = true WHERE id = $1`, userID, email); err != nil {
// Lost the race the guarded SELECT above cannot serialise: the index rejects
// the second write, and it reads as the same answer the sequential path gives.
// The rollback undoes the OTP consumption with it, so the code stays live.
if isUniqueViolation(err) {
return "", ErrEmailTaken
}
return "", fmt.Errorf("mark email verified: %w", err)
}
if err := tx.Commit(); err != nil {
+5 -2
View File
@@ -309,7 +309,10 @@ type Repo interface {
// mismatch increments attempts and returns ErrOTPInvalid WITHOUT consuming the
// code (so a typo does not burn it). On a match the code is consumed and the
// user row is flipped to email=<the proven address>, email_verified=true; the
// proven email is returned. now is the API clock so expiry is testable.
// proven email is returned — unless a DIFFERENT account has already proven the
// same address, which is ErrEmailTaken with the code left unconsumed (the
// address, not the code, is the problem). now is the API clock so expiry is
// testable.
//
// This is the ONBOARDING primitive: verifying the code is the moment the address
// becomes proven, so the write is load-bearing. The pre-session LOGIN door must
@@ -490,7 +493,7 @@ type Repo interface {
// (email_verified true), so a merely-asserted or unverified address never
// resolves to a session-mintable identity — an attacker cannot claim someone
// else's login by typing their email. Matching is on lower(email) to align with
// the users_verified_email_unique partial index (migration 0010), which
// the users_verified_email_unique partial index (migration 0020), which
// guarantees at most one verified row per normalized address, so the result is
// unambiguous. A player (role='user') row resolves too — email-first login is
// passwordless and role-agnostic here; the door that consumes this result decides