Speaking Different Languages: How to Align Dev and Sec Teams Effectively

Security issues in software development often stem not from developers’ lack of concern but from a fundamental disconnect between development and security teams. Each wants to do their job well, but their goals and expectations frequently conflict. This misalignment costs organizations in heightened security risks and tangible operational setbacks. Security issues identified too late in the cycle delay releases and increase project costs. This conflict leads to ongoing tensions that demoralize both teams, reducing efficiency and job satisfaction.

Research shows that security risks can be managed, as 72% of vulnerabilities in web applications are detectable and preventable. However, to do this, teams need to align to meet security goals without stomping on development’s need to quickly and efficiently produce code.

Issues with alignment

There is an inherent friction between the software development and security teams based on their goals and communication styles. Developers are typically driven by timelines and the rapid deployment of new features, focusing heavily on speed and innovation. In contrast, security teams prioritize the meticulous identification and mitigation of risks, which can inherently slow down these processes.

This difference in priorities often leads to communication gaps, as the two groups’ technical jargon and job focus vary significantly. Developers may not fully understand the depth of security requirements, while security professionals might overlook the intense pressure developers face to adhere to release schedules. This misalignment not only hampers the efficiency of both teams but also impacts the overall security and functionality of the products developed.

Language and terminology

Divergence in professional jargon between development and security teams significantly complicates collaboration. Misunderstandings due to different terminologies can lead to incorrect or incomplete security integration. Developers might implement security recommendations incorrectly if they do not fully understand the security terminology, potentially leaving vulnerabilities. When team members misinterpret technical jargon, it can lead to repeated clarifications and corrections, disrupt workflows, and lead to inefficiencies in project timelines and outcomes.

To bridge the gap, organizations must help build a common language, starting with a cross-functional glossary. By developing a comprehensive list of terms commonly used by development and security teams, all team members can better understand critical communications, reducing the risk of misinterpretations leading to security lapses and operational inefficiencies.

Additionally, fostering collaboration on project documentation from the outset clarifies terminology. It aligns understanding, ensuring both teams are on the same page from the start of a project to its completion. This proactive approach minimizes delays and enhances security integration.

Differences in prioritization

The clashing priorities between teams often lead to significant challenges in software development. Development teams, driven by the need for speed and functionality, may overlook thorough security measures to meet deadlines. This oversight can leave software vulnerable to risks that proper security protocols would mitigate. Conversely, security teams prioritize rigorous safety and compliance measures that can delay the launch of new features, causing frustration and tension among developers under pressure to deliver on tight schedules.

Implementing joint planning sessions from the start of a project can be crucial to addressing these differences in priorities. These sessions ensure that both teams align on objectives and timelines, facilitating a mutual understanding of each other’s needs. Additionally, creating compromise strategies can help balance the urgency of development with the necessity of security. Developing shared Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that reflect security and development goals can create common goals to reduce conflicts and enhance productivity.

Cultural barriers

Cultural barriers between development and security teams can also significantly hinder project success. Developers often view security protocols as burdensome, slowing down their workflow and seeing them as obstacles rather than safeguards. This resistance can compromise security and the final product’s safety. Conversely, security teams may perceive the developers’ fast-paced practices as careless, potentially sacrificing thoroughness for speed, eroding trust, and hindering collaborative efforts.

Fulfilling a shared understanding and respect through joint team-building activities can effectively overcome these cultural divides. Such initiatives allow team members from both sides to appreciate each other’s challenges and contributions outside of their regular work context, breaking down stereotypes and fostering camaraderie.

Integration of tools and processes

Integrating diverse toolsets presents significant challenges, often stemming from their inherent incompatibilities. Development teams frequently use tools not optimized for security measures like scanning and compliance checks, causing a substantial disconnect. This leads to inefficiencies, as additional steps or repeated efforts are needed, slowing down processes and fueling frustration among developers. Moreover, weaving security tools into existing development pipelines, such as CI/CD systems, adds a layer of complexity that is both technically demanding and resource-intensive. This complexity can breed resistance from developers who are wary of potential disruptions to their workflows and project timelines.

Adopting a unified developer security platform is essential to address these integration challenges. Platforms like DevSecOps tools that can be seamlessly integrated into existing CI/CD pipelines, effectively reduce the friction caused by using disparate tools and ensure that security measures are an intrinsic part of the development process from its inception.

Additionally, standardizing processes across both development and security teams—including setting clear protocols for tool usage and embedding security checks throughout the development stages—can minimize misunderstandings and maintain consistent security practices across projects.

Training and workshops

Cybersecurity teams may try to bridge the gap with developers by offering cybersecurity training to align them with their objectives. However, existing training often fails to resonate with developers due to its theoretical focus, which lacks practical relevance to their day-to-day coding tasks. This gap in applicability can lead to a significant disconnect, preventing developers from effectively applying learned security principles in real-world scenarios.

Much of the content may be generic to be universally applicable, which will likely not engage developers. This results in a retention gap where crucial security knowledge is neither understood nor remembered, diminishing their motivation to implement these practices.

Scenario-based learning is a significant improvement over generic training. However, the most impactful training happens directly within the developer's workflow. Instead of pulling developers out for separate sessions, Snyk’s developer-first approach provides security education at the moment a vulnerability is found.

When the Snyk platform identifies an issue, it provides not just an alert, but also AI-native workflows that include actionable remediation advice and in-context lessons. This transforms every finding into a practical learning opportunity, empowering developers to not only fix the current issue but also to write more secure code in the future.

Snyk: The common language for developers and security teams

The Snyk AI Trust Platform is designed to be the bridge between your development and security teams, creating a common language of prioritized, contextualized risk. Our AI-ready engines, including Snyk API & Web for DAST, integrate seamlessly into the CI/CD pipeline.

This provides developers with fast, actionable feedback and AI-native workflows like Snyk Assist and Snyk Agent Fix to reduce the time and effort of remediation. For security teams, the platform offers AI-powered visibility and policy enforcement across the entire SDLC. By translating complex security concerns into clear, developer-friendly advice, Snyk empowers both teams to speak the same language, fix issues faster, and build secure applications without sacrificing speed.

Book a demo today and see how the Snyk AI Trust Platform can unite your teams and embed security seamlessly into your development process.