Development Integration Patterns

SAST integration into development workflows has matured significantly. IDE plugins provide real-time feedback as developers write code, highlighting security issues immediately. Git hooks enforce security checks before code commits. Pull request integration enables security review alongside code review. CI/CD pipeline integration ensures consistent security analysis with every build. This multi-point integration creates defense in depth throughout development.

IAST integration patterns differ due to runtime requirements. Development environment integration requires developers to run applications with IAST agents enabled, potentially impacting local performance. Test environment integration leverages existing QA processes, with IAST analyzing security during functional testing. CI/CD integration focuses on automated test execution rather than build-time analysis. The runtime requirement shapes integration possibilities and developer experience.

The integration differences influence adoption patterns. SAST's build-time analysis fits naturally into existing development pipelines with minimal workflow disruption. IAST requires runtime environments and test execution, demanding more infrastructure and process changes. Organizations often find SAST easier to initially deploy, while IAST provides better long-term value through superior accuracy.