Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-78339. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-78339 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

1 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with Not reported where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-78339 using CVSS 6.3, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

The supplied mitigation guidance says to apply vendor patches and restrict external exposure until fixed. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations. Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

mediumAccess Controlpublic exploit

CVE-2026-78339

CVE-2026-78339 — Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical…

Q: What is CVE-2026-78339?

CVE-2026-78339 is Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical…. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Access Control mapped to CWE-732 CWE-732.

Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure, Protection mechanism bypass, and Unauthorized access.

Published Oct 9, 2026Updated Oct 9, 2026Sources: NVD, Dell (CNA), GitHub, SOCRadar CTI

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Exploit code

public exploit, none observed

EPSS

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

Dell

Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager

CVSS base

6.3

medium

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status
Dell	Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager	0 to < 5.36.00.16 or later	Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Availability

None

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Scope

Unchanged

Attack Complexity

High

Attack Vector

Local

Privileges Req

Low

User Interaction

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Source
6.3	CVSS 3.1	medium	1	5.2	emc.com (CNA), Dell (CNA)

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

What this weakness leads to

MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.

MITRE

CWE-732 · Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource

Read Application Data
Read Files or Directories
Gain Privileges or Assume Identity
Modify Application Data

Mitigation: When using a critical resource such as a configuration file, check to see if the resource has insecure permissions (such as being modifiable by any regular user) [REF-62], and generate an error or even exit the software if there is a possibility that the resource could have been modified by an unauthorized party.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-732

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

CAPEC-122 · Privilege AbuseCAPEC-61 · Session FixationCAPEC-17 · Using Malicious FilesCAPEC-127 · Directory IndexingCAPEC-642 · Replace BinariesCAPEC-1 · Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLsCAPEC-62 · Cross Site Request ForgeryCAPEC-180 · Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security LevelsCAPEC-60 · Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)CAPEC-234 · Hijacking a privileged processCAPEC-206 · Signing Malicious Code

T1574.010Hijack Execution Flow: ServicesFile Permissions Weakness
T1548Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism
T1083File and Directory Discovery

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Repositories

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 1 public PoC repositories were reported.

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 6.3 (AV:L)
Oct 9, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Oct 9, 2026 · NVD
CVE published by MITRE.
Oct 9, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

1 on the record

www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-ca/000503592/dsa-2026-385-security-update-for-dell-secure-connect-gateway-policy-manager-multiple-vulnerabilities?msockid=3021cac2195069ed3194ddad186a68f9
Vendor Advisory, NIST

Elsewhere on this site

Dellevery CVE for this vendor
Access Controlsame class
CWE-732other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record1

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-78339 is Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains an Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical…, a medium vulnerability affecting Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager from Dell. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-78339. Public exploit evidence is: 1 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 6.3 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.