-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 124
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
com.microsoft.identity.client.exception.MsalClientException: The signed in account does not match with the provided account. #1905
Comments
@Digipom Can you please share the link to issues? |
All of the above mentioned issues doesn't have same environment. Could you provide more details about the specific error message you're encountering and share MSAL logs if possible? |
Basically, if not using the deprecated methods and using the builder methods instead, we get a "com.microsoft.identity.client.exception.MsalClientException: The signed in account does not match with the provided account.". It seems we need to provide an account then but I'm wary about releasing that to production given the other issues that are open. Can the new methods just use the persisted account the way that the deprecated ones do? |
FYI A client of mine is seeing the same after changing password. He can log in on devices with freshly installed app, but not on the one he was using before changing password. |
FYI. As I said it happens when user changes password while user was previously logged into mobile application. When that happens, AcquireTokenParameters. |
Are there any updates on this one? The methods are still deprecated but the new ones are still not a 1:1 replacement, due to the behavior of getPersistedCurrentAccount(). |
After migrating from the "deprecated" clientApp.acquireTokenSilentAsync, I started encountering this error. Looking at Stack Overflow and GitHub, it seems the current solution is to use the deprecated methods; however, the issues were closed. Since I'm still encountering the error on 4.6.2, is using the deprecated methods still the recommended solution?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: