VulnerabilityAwaiting classification

CVE-2026-55398

MEDIUM · 6.9 CVSS v4.0 Published 2026-07-15
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
78/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click 6 weeks old

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
CVE-2026-55398 is a memory management vulnerability in Secure Access clients and servers prior to 14.55. Attackers with intimate knowledge of and total control over the tunnel protocol can create a non-persistent DoS against the server.

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 · moderate confidence

This is a memory management vulnerability in Secure Access clients and servers running versions prior to 14.55. An attacker with intimate knowledge of and total control over the proprietary tunnel protocol can exploit improper memory handling to cause a non-persistent denial of service against the server.

MitigationUpgrade all Secure Access clients and servers to version 14.55 or later. Since exploitation requires intimate knowledge and total control of the tunnel protocol, ensure network segmentation limits exposure to trusted personnel only.

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:N/VI:N/VA:L/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. Identify Secure Access software installation
    Locate Secure Access client or server software on the system. Look for processes named 'Secure Access', 'SAClient', or 'SAServer', or check installed programs for Secure Access components.
    Affected if Secure Access software is found running or installed on the system
  2. Determine installed version
    Use the software's built-in version check command, about dialog, or check version information in the software's binary/properties. Common methods: 'SecureAccess -v', right-click executable > Properties > Details, or check the Windows registry under HKLM\Software\SecureAccess.
    Affected if The installed version is lower than 14.55 (e.g., 14.54, 14.50, any version prior to 14.55)
  3. Verify tunnel protocol configuration
    Examine the Secure Access configuration files or admin console for tunnel protocol settings. Look for 'proprietary tunnel', 'custom tunnel', 'secure tunnel', or similar tunnel-related protocol options.
    Affected if The proprietary tunnel protocol feature is enabled or configured in the Secure Access settings
  4. Assess network exposure
    Review firewall rules, network segmentation, and access controls surrounding the Secure Access server. Determine if the server listens on external-facing interfaces or is accessible from untrusted networks.
    Affected if The Secure Access server is directly exposed to untrusted or external networks without proper network segmentation

You are affected if Secure Access software with a version prior to 14.55 is installed, the proprietary tunnel protocol is enabled, and the server is accessible to untrusted actors who could control the tunnel protocol.

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

Upgrade all Secure Access clients and servers to version 14.55 or later. Since exploitation requires intimate knowledge and total control of the tunnel protocol, ensure network segmentation limits exposure to trusted personnel only.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-55398 — 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-2026-55398 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