One can see a rationale in not having a security group - every team should have security focus (eg by having expertise & champions within each group). You can't tack on security, you have to build it in.
I disagree - the motivations of the security group and the product group are different. If the security team is under the product team leadership, the security team is disincentivized to interrupt a product launch due to a security issue, because they're rewarded by shipping a product, not making it secure. Really, you should have both: you should have a security team that sits with the product team and works with them through the lifecycle of the product, and has continuity (i.e. it's the same security people with your product team through the life of the product, mostly), but that security team reports to different management and has their promotions, bonuses, etc. handled by a different leadership chain than the product team.
I think you need both. Same as I think you need i10n and a8y at both layers.
A8y? That can't be a thing... if it is, we should put a stop to it. axb maybe?