Measuring Secure Coding Practice and Culture: A Finger Pointing at the Moon is not the Moon
Ita Ryan, Utz Roedig, Klaas-Jan Stol
Abstract
Software security research has a core problem: it is impossible to prove the security of complex software. A low number of known defects may simply indicate that the software has not been attacked yet, or that successful attacks have not been detected. A high defect count may be the result of white-hat hacker targeting, or of a successful bug bounty program which prevented insecurities from persisting in the wild. This makes it difficult to measure the security of non-trivial software. Researchers instead usually measure effort directed towards ensuring software security. However, different researchers use their own tailored measures, usually devised from industry secure coding guidelines. Not only is there no agreed way to measure effort, there is also no agreement on what effort entails. Qualitative studies emphasise the importance of security culture in an organisation. Where software security practices are introduced solely to ensure compliance with legislative or industry standards, a box-ticking attitude to security may result. The security culture may be weak or non-existent, making it likely that precautions not explicitly mentioned in the standards will be missed. Thus, researchers need both a way to assess software security practice and a way to measure software security culture. To assess security practice, we converted the empirically-established 12 most common software security activities into questions. To assess security culture, we devised a number of questions grounded in prior literature. We ran a secure development survey with both sets of questions, obtaining organic responses from 1,100 software coders in 59 countries. We used proven common activities to assess security practice, and made a first attempt to quantitatively assess aspects of security culture in the broad developer population. Our results show that some coders still work in environments where there is little to no attempt to ensure code security. Security practice and culture do not always correlate, and some organisations with strong secure coding practice have weak secure coding culture. This may lead to problems in defect prevention and sustained software security effort.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 0d10db7a-d843-4535-a6d3-e2943ab19804Cited by top-tier papers3
- Unhelpful Assumptions in Software Security ResearchIta Ryan, Utz Roedig, Klaas-Jan StolCCS 2023 · 9 citations
- Mapping the Cloud: A Mixed-Methods Study of Cloud Security and Privacy Configuration ChallengesSumair Ijaz Hashmi, Shafay Kashif, Lea Gröber, Katharina Krombholz et al.NDSS 2026 · 3 citations
- Weak Programmers Need Not Apply, LLMs Welcome! Survey Screening in the AI EraIta Ryan, Utz Roedig, Klaas-Jan StolICSE 2026
Builds on9
- Why Do Developers Get Password Storage Wrong?: A Qualitative Usability StudyAlena Naiakshina, Anastasia Danilova, Christian Tiefenau, Marco Herzog et al.CCS 2017 · 146 citations
- A Qualitative Study of Dependency Management and Its Security ImplicationsIvan Pashchenko, Duc-Ly Vu, Fabio MassacciCCS 2020 · 84 citations
- Privacy Champions in Software Teams: Understanding Their Motivations, Strategies, and ChallengesMohammad Tahaei, Alisa Frik, Kami VanieaCHI 2021 · 75 citations
- On Conducting Security Developer Studies with CS Students: Examining a Password-Storage Study with CS Students, Freelancers, and Company DevelopersAlena Naiakshina, Anastasia Danilova, Eva Gerlitz, Matthew SmithCHI 2020 · 48 citations
- Building and Validating a Scale for Secure Software Development Self-EfficacyDaniel Votipka, Desiree Abrokwa, Michelle L. MazurekCHI 2020 · 35 citations
Related papers
- Software security during modern code review: the developer's perspectiveLarissa Braz, Alberto BacchelliFSE 2022 · 28 citations
- Analyzing the Use of Public and In-house Secure Development Guidelines in U.S. and Japanese IndustriesFumihiro Kanei, Ayako Akiyama Hasegawa, Eitaro Shioji, Mitsuaki AkiyamaCHI 2023 · 4 citations
- An Empirical Study on Software Bill of Materials: Where We Stand and the Road AheadBoming Xia, Tingting Bi, Zhenchang Xing, Qinghua Lu et al.ICSE 2023 · 82 citations
- Less is More: Supporting Developers in Vulnerability Detection during Code ReviewLarissa Braz, Christian Aeberhard, Gül Çalikli, Alberto BacchelliICSE 2022 · 26 citations
- An Industry Interview Study of Software Signing for Supply Chain SecurityKelechi G. Kalu, Tanmay Singla, Chinenye Okafor, Santiago Torres-Arias et al.USENIX Security 2025
