fix: max cookie maxage is 400 days #37
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
2 tasks
|
I second this. It would be best for the community and ecosystem. |
|
Thank you for the PR. We are discussing this internally and will get back soon |
|
Addressed in another PR, sorry didn't see this one was open as it was raised internally. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Bug fix
What is the current behavior?
Cookies are currently being set to a Max-Age of 1000 years, instead of 365 days. Per this RFC, 400 days is the maximum age that can be set for a cookie.
What is the new behavior?
Cookie Max-Age is set to 400 days.
Additional context
I first brought up this PR on the old auth-helpers repo: supabase/auth-helpers#776
As of Chrome 104, this 400 day limit is enforced and any Max-Age > 400 days will be forced down to 400 days.
This is breaking my usage with Hono (see honojs/hono#2762) and Hono does not seem motivated to change their stance on this RFC from the web server side of things.