Email validation broken

[timothyarmes]

Hi,

zod is rejecting valid email addresses of the form a@b.c.com (note the two dots after the @).

[mauricedb]

Same here. And the email in question is actually used to send emails so definitely works. The actual email we are using is more like abcde.abcd+1234567890123@abcdefg.com.test-google-a.com where I replaced letters for other letters etc for privacy.

[reminjp]

2157 (or #2274) should solve this. but not yet merged.

[cullylarson]

Another example of a failing address: a@asdf.ka1.asdf.com. There's something about the number in ka1 that it doesn't like. Same with abc@wer.asd1.com and abc@wer.asd1aa.com

[hkroger]

Is this moving or is there a version that we can downgrade to fix this?

[Dimrok]

Same for first.last@physik.uni-muenchen.de.

[Dimrok]

To give more context, the current implementation favors speed over correctness.

// old version: too slow, didn't support unicode

// from https://stackoverflow.com/a/46181/1550155
// old version: too slow, didn't support unicode
// const emailRegex = /^((([a-z]|\d|[!#\$%&'\*\+\-\/=\?\^_`{\|}~]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])+(\.([a-z]|\d|[!#\$%&'\*\+\-\/=\?\^_`{\|}~]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])+)*)|((\x22)((((\x20|\x09)*(\x0d\x0a))?(\x20|\x09)+)?(([\x01-\x08\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x1f\x7f]|\x21|[\x23-\x5b]|[\x5d-\x7e]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])|(\\([\x01-\x09\x0b\x0c\x0d-\x7f]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF]))))*(((\x20|\x09)*(\x0d\x0a))?(\x20|\x09)+)?(\x22)))@((([a-z]|\d|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])|(([a-z]|\d|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])([a-z]|\d|-|\.|_|~|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])*([a-z]|\d|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])))\.)+(([a-z]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])|(([a-z]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])([a-z]|\d|-|\.|_|~|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])*([a-z]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])))$/i;
//old email regex
// const emailRegex = /^(([^<>()[\].,;:\s@"]+(\.[^<>()[\].,;:\s@"]+)*)|(".+"))@((?!-)([^<>()[\].,;:\s@"]+\.)+[^<>()[\].,;:\s@"]{1,})[^-<>()[\].,;:\s@"]$/i;
// eslint-disable-next-line
// const emailRegex =
//   /^(([^<>()[\]\\.,;:\s@\"]+(\.[^<>()[\]\\.,;:\s@\"]+)*)|(\".+\"))@((\[(((25[0-5])|(2[0-4][0-9])|(1[0-9]{2})|([0-9]{1,2}))\.){3}((25[0-5])|(2[0-4][0-9])|(1[0-9]{2})|([0-9]{1,2}))\])|(\[IPv6:(([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){7}|::([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){0,6}|([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){1}:([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){0,5}|([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){2}:([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){0,4}|([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){3}:([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){0,3}|([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){4}:([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){0,2}|([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){5}:([a-f0-9]{1,4}:){0,1})([a-f0-9]{1,4}|(((25[0-5])|(2[0-4][0-9])|(1[0-9]{2})|([0-9]{1,2}))\.){3}((25[0-5])|(2[0-4][0-9])|(1[0-9]{2})|([0-9]{1,2})))\])|([A-Za-z0-9]([A-Za-z0-9-]*[A-Za-z0-9])*(\.[A-Za-z]{2,})+))$/;
// const emailRegex =
//   /^[a-zA-Z0-9\.\!\#\$\%\&\'\*\+\/\=\?\^\_\`\{\|\}\~\-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9](?:[a-zA-Z0-9-]{0,61}[a-zA-Z0-9])?(?:\.[a-zA-Z0-9](?:[a-zA-Z0-9-]{0,61}[a-zA-Z0-9])?)*$/;
// const emailRegex =
//   /^(?:[a-z0-9!#$%&'*+/=?^_`{|}~-]+(?:\.[a-z0-9!#$%&'*+/=?^_`{|}~-]+)*|"(?:[\x01-\x08\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x1f\x21\x23-\x5b\x5d-\x7f]|\\[\x01-\x09\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x7f])*")@(?:(?:[a-z0-9](?:[a-z0-9-]*[a-z0-9])?\.)+[a-z0-9](?:[a-z0-9-]*[a-z0-9])?|\[(?:(?:25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[01]?[0-9][0-9]?)\.){3}(?:25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[01]?[0-9][0-9]?|[a-z0-9-]*[a-z0-9]:(?:[\x01-\x08\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x1f\x21-\x5a\x53-\x7f]|\\[\x01-\x09\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x7f])+)\])$/i;
const emailRegex =
  /^([A-Z0-9_+-]+\.?)*[A-Z0-9_+-]@([A-Z0-9][A-Z0-9\-]*\.)+[A-Z]{2,}$/i;
// const emailRegex =
//   /^[a-z0-9.!#$%&’*+/=?^_`{|}~-]+@[a-z0-9-]+(?:\.[a-z0-9\-]+)*$/i;

For those who want correctness, a z.string().refine(...) with your chosen regex or validate.js should do the trick.

[adamwdennis]

When will a new release be cut with these changes? @colinhacks

[AlexandreBourdeaudhui]

Hey, same issue here with xxx@xxx.xxx-tech.sncf Have we any ETA for the new release ? Wanna try it 🙌

[paradox37]

Just got a report from the user that his email is not accepted. Format is email@something.something-email.com. It would be nice for this to be fixed ASAP.

[intellix]

Two emails I'm seeing that are failing and are both valid:

xxxxxxx@students.bcsc.k12.in.us
xxxxxxx@vip.163.com

It's like it hates numbers

[micmcgrorty]

Apostrophes in names are also broken, so if your name is eg O'Reilly and that's in your email address it now fails Zod validation.

[DavidTimms]

@colinhacks I believe this issue is now fixed and the issue can be closed. All of the examples provided in this thread are successfully parsed by Zod 3.22.4.

[redbmk]

@DavidTimms I'm still seeing the issue with apostrophes in 3.22.4

❯ grep version node_modules/zod/package.json
  "version": "3.22.4",
❯ node
Welcome to Node.js v21.5.0.
Type ".help" for more information.
> require('zod').z.string().url().parse("O'Reilly@example.com")
Uncaught:
[
  {
    "validation": "url",
    "code": "invalid_string",
    "message": "Invalid url",
    "path": []
  }
]
    at get error [as error] (/path/to/node_modules/zod/lib/types.js:43:31)
    at ZodString.parse (/path/to/node_modules/zod/lib/types.js:143:22) {
  issues: [
    {
      validation: 'url',
      code: 'invalid_string',
      message: 'Invalid url',
      path: []
    }
  ],
  addIssue: [Function (anonymous)],
  addIssues: [Function (anonymous)],
  name: 'ZodError',
  errors: [
    {
      validation: 'url',
      code: 'invalid_string',
      message: 'Invalid url',
      path: []
    }
  ]
}

[seanmacisaac]

For those wanting apostrophes to work, the patch is very simple and you can see it in my PR. In our application we've applied this via patch-package. One note is that depending on how you bundle if you go the patch-package route you might need to also patch the generated files as well. If you grep for emailRegex in your node_modules/zod you can see the 4 places it shows up.

I would love to get the PR merged here and not have to have the patch, if there is something else I need to do please let me know.

[willdspd]

A possibly related bug: Incorrectly formatted emails with multiple TLD 'dots' are incorrectly passing validation. For example, johndoe@yahoo.co..uk passes validation, which it shouldn't due to .. between co and uk. I'm on version 3.20.5

[fuzzypawzz]

Danish/Swedish letters like ö or ø isn't accepted either. Those are valid to have in emails nowadays (90% sure about this). Example:
someemailwithø@gmail.com

Just want to put it out there. Lmk if I should create a new issue for this :-)

[colinhacks]

I'm closing this since #2157 is the current final word on this. Nearly all the issues with dots and apostrophes have been resolved in Zod 3.22 or 3.23.

@fuzzypawzz Those characters aren't allowed in Gmail which is part of the rationale behind making Zod's email validation quite strict.

[fuzzypawzz]

@colinhacks Sorry for my bad example. It's correct that gmail doesn't allow those letters. However there are email providers that allows those special letters, and it's an issue in Nordic enterprises - you could argue that's it is not a major issue, however we (the corp im working for currently) are not able to use the email validator from Zod, instead we would have to build our own custom validators, because some users are indeed having email addresses with ø for example.

[boblitex]

bob_+.'b@gmail.com also somehow passes zod validation. if I remove the last alphabet, then it doesn't pass, but adding that last 'b' makes it pass somehow