Missing AuthenticationWeakness · CWE-306

CVE-2026-6376

HIGH · 8.7 CVSS v4.0 Published 2026-04-23
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
96/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
A weakness in SpiceJet’s public booking retrieval page permits full passenger booking details to be accessed using only a PNR and last name, with no authentication or verification mechanisms. This results in exposure of extensive personal, travel, and booking metadata to any unauthenticated user who can obtain or guess those basic inputs. The issue arises from improper access control on a sensitive data retrieval function.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

SpiceJet's booking retrieval endpoint lacks proper access control, allowing unauthenticated users to retrieve complete passenger booking details (including personal information, travel itineraries, and booking metadata) by simply supplying a PNR and last name. This represents a classic Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability where the sensitive retrieval function performs no authorization verification against the requesting user.

MitigationImplement multi-factor verification (e.g., email/phone OTP, CAPTCHA) or require additional authentication factors before returning booking data. Also implement rate limiting to prevent automated enumeration of PNRs.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Locate the booking retrieval endpoint
    Search application source code and API documentation for endpoints that handle PNR (Passenger Name Record) and last name parameters for booking lookups
    Affected if An endpoint accepting PNR and last name exists in the environment
  2. Verify authentication is required
    Attempt to access the booking endpoint without providing any session token, API key, or login credentials
    Affected if The endpoint returns booking data or accepts the request without requiring authentication
  3. Confirm authorization validation
    Submit a valid PNR and last name from one account, then attempt the same request from a different unauthenticated or different-user session to see if booking data is returned
    Affected if The endpoint returns full booking details (passenger info, itinerary, metadata) without verifying the requester is authorized to access that specific booking
  4. Check for additional verification factors
    Inspect whether the endpoint requires secondary verification such as OTP, CAPTCHA, or other factors beyond PNR and last name
    Affected if The endpoint returns sensitive booking data using only PNR and last name without additional verification steps

Your environment is affected if the booking retrieval endpoint returns complete passenger booking details without requiring both authentication and authorization verification for the specific booking being requested.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement multi-factor verification (e.g., email/phone OTP, CAPTCHA) or require additional authentication factors before returning booking data. Also implement rate limiting to prevent automated enumeration of PNRs.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation16.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
34.0 hours of engineering $6,000
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,600.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-6376 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-6376 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data