Building a Security Culture: Integrating Security into Engineering

Introduction

Security works best when it is embedded within engineering, not imposed from above. The most effective product security programs don’t treat security as a separate function but as a natural part of the development process—as fundamental as code quality or performance.

Yet, many organizations get this wrong. Instead of partnering with engineers, security teams create bureaucratic roadblocks, handing down vague mandates without context, expertise, or prioritization. This approach leads to frustration, inefficiency, and, ultimately, worse security outcomes.

Your organization may not yet have full-time product security engineers, but that doesn’t mean you can’t start fostering the right dynamic between security and development today.

In this article, we’ll explore:

• Why embedding security engineers in development teams leads to better security
• How to integrate security into the engineering workflow without creating bottlenecks
• Why security bugs should be treated like any other bug—triaged and prioritized appropriately
• How security teams can provide actionable guidance, not just problem identification

Embedding Security in Engineering: Why It Works

A centralized security team that dictates security practices from the outside rarely works well. Security engineers must have deep knowledge of the codebase, development practices, and customer needs to provide meaningful security guidance.

Key Benefits of Embedded Security Engineers

? Context & Expertise: They understand the architecture and technologies in use, leading to realistic and practical security recommendations.

? Collaboration, Not Conflict: Engineers see security as a partner, not an adversary, leading to better adoption of security practices.

? Faster Resolution: Security concerns are addressed in real time instead of waiting for a quarterly audit or external review.

? Ownership & Trust: Developers take security seriously when they see security engineers as part of their team—not an outside group assigning blame.

A Cautionary Tale: Security from a Distance

Many large enterprises create centralized product security review teams that oversee security across multiple product lines and engineering teams. These team lack deep technical understanding of each product but are frequently given authority to dictate security practices. They:

• Provide generic advice that doesn’t align with individual codebases—they lack deep knowledge of your codebase.
• Cannot help with prioritizing security risks based on business impact—they don't know your business.
• Set unrealistic goals like "Zero security bugs," ignoring the reality that some level of risk is always present and must be managed, not eliminated.
• Take credit for security successes but blame engineering for failures.

The result? Engineering resentment, slow development cycles, and weaker security overall. Consequently, I strongly discourage centralizing security review and oversight, in favor of a "shift left" approach that embeds security directly within engineering organizations.

Security Bugs Are Bugs: Triage and Prioritize Accordingly

Security flaws should be treated like any other bug—triaged, prioritized, and addressed based on severity and risk. Not all security issues require immediate remediation, just as not all functional bugs are showstoppers.

A Sensible Approach to Security Bug Management

?? Triage like any other bug – Evaluate impact, exploitability, and likelihood before determining urgency.

?? Use a risk-based approach – Fixing security issues should align with business priorities and available resources.

?? Communicate decisions transparently – Engineering and security teams should work together to decide whether a security issue requires immediate attention or can be deferred.

?? Not every bug gets fixed – Some security issues are so low risk that they may never be prioritized for remediation. This is normal and ensures that resources are focused on addressing more significant risks or advancing critical product features.

Poorly managed security triage leads to misplaced priorities, wasted effort, and engineering friction. A well-run security triage process ensures that critical risks are fixed quickly while lower-priority issues don’t derail development.

Security Teams Must Add Value, Not Just Identify Problems

A security engineer's role isn’t just to point out flaws—it’s to help fix them. Simply saying, “Hey, engineer, there’s a security bug, and you need to fix it,” is not helpful. A security engineer without development experience who dictates changes without understanding feasibility does more harm than good. Good security involvement means providing a valuable service to your engineering team, and great security treats developers like a valued customer, not a vendor that has to deliver security—or else.

The Right Approach: Security Engineers as Problem Solvers

? Triage security issues intelligently, considering business impact, likelihood of exploitation, and mitigation options.

? Provide actionable remediation guidance, tailored to the codebase and development framework.

? Collaborate with engineering teams, offering practical solutions instead of vague mandates.

? Automate where possible, using security tooling in CI/CD to catch issues early before they become roadblocks.

When security teams focus on partnership instead of policing, security becomes an enabler rather than a bottleneck.

Conclusion

Security succeeds when it is part of the engineering culture, not an external mandate. Effective security teams serve as partners, providing real value to engineers, while truly great security treats developers as valued customers—not as vendors forced to 'deliver security or else.'

Key takeaways:

? Embed security engineers in development teams to provide relevant, practical security guidance.

? Treat security bugs like any other bug, triaging and prioritizing them based on real-world risk and impact.

? Security teams should help fix problems, not just identify them—partnering with developers to offer remediation guidance, not just reports.

Security works best when it’s a shared responsibility, not a bottleneck. Embedding security within engineering teams—rather than relying on a centralized review process—helps create a culture where security is proactive and cooperative, not reactive. How does your organization approach this balance? Have you seen successes (or struggles) in making security a first-class concern within engineering? Let’s discuss—drop your thoughts in the comments!

Next Up: The Role of Product Management in Security

In the next article, we’ll explore how product managers influence security outcomes and why security should be treated as a key product feature—not just an engineering concern.