CVE-2026-67334VulnerabilityPublished 1 Aug 2026

better-auth versions before 1.6.11 fail to delete cached sessions when removing users via admin, anonymous, or SCIM endpoints when secondaryStorage is configured and storeSessionInDatabase is false

Affects better-authSource GCVE Database

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.8 Low : upgrade to 1.6.11 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 20:25 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.8Low

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 25% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.6.11

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 1 Aug 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 30 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

ghsa-gj53-4jmf-7745

What to do

Upgrade better-auth/better-auth to 1.6.11.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubbetter-auth/better-auth`pkg:github/better-auth/better-auth`Other threats	Affected <1.6.11	Fixed in 1.6.11

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

If you cannot patch yet, administrators should consider manually invalidating cached sessions when deleting users, especially when using secondaryStorage with storeSessionInDatabase set to false.

Description

better-auth versions before 1.6.11 fail to delete cached sessions when removing users via admin, anonymous, or SCIM endpoints when secondaryStorage is configured and storeSessionInDatabase is false. Attackers can reuse deleted user session tokens to maintain authentication for up to seven days after account deletion.

Impact

Attackers with high privileges can exploit this vulnerability to reuse session tokens of deleted users, maintaining unauthorized authenticated access for up to seven days after the user account has been deleted. The confidentiality and integrity of the system are impacted to a limited extent, while availability is not affected.

Summary

The vulnerability in better-auth prior to version 1.6.11 involves failure to delete cached sessions upon user removal through various endpoints when secondaryStorage is enabled and storeSessionInDatabase is disabled. This session persistence flaw (CWE-459) enables attackers to reuse session tokens of deleted users, maintaining authenticated access for up to seven days post-deletion. The CVSS 3.1 vector indicates network attack vector, low complexity, high privileges required, no user interaction, unchanged scope, and limited confidentiality and integrity impact.

CWE-459Incomplete Cleanup (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product does not properly "clean up" and remove temporary or supporting resources after they have been used.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Temporary files and other supporting resources should be deleted/released immediately after they are no longer needed.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 1 Aug 2026, 21:20 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-459

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats