![]() |
市場調查報告書
商品編碼
1844397
DevSecOps 市場按產品、類型、部署方式、組織規模和產業分類 - 全球預測 2025-2032 年DevSecOps Market by Offering, Type, Deployment Mode, Organization Size, Industry Vertical - Global Forecast 2025-2032 |
||||||
※ 本網頁內容可能與最新版本有所差異。詳細情況請與我們聯繫。
預計到 2032 年,DevSecOps 市場將成長至 166.7 億美元,複合年成長率為 11.53%。
| 主要市場統計數據 | |
|---|---|
| 基準年 2024 | 69.6億美元 |
| 預計年份:2025年 | 77.2億美元 |
| 預測年份:2032年 | 166.7億美元 |
| 複合年成長率 (%) | 11.53% |
對於加速數位轉型的企業而言,開發、安全和維運的整合正從理想化的最佳實踐逐漸轉變為營運的必要條件。這種轉變凸顯了整合工具鏈、自動化安全策略以及開發、安全和維運團隊之間課責共用的重要性。隨著企業擴展雲端原生架構並採用持續交付,在生命週期早期偵測和修復漏洞的能力已成為提升系統韌性和縮短產品上市時間的關鍵因素。
因此,技術領導者、安全架構師和產品經理正在重新思考管治模型和採購方法,以在風險管理和快速功能交付之間取得平衡。這種演變需要流程、人員和技術之間的微妙協調。平台團隊必須啟用預設安全模板,安全團隊必須將實踐規範化為機器可讀格式,而開發團隊必須在不犧牲速度的前提下採用安全編碼和自動化檢驗。以下章節整合了轉型轉變、實踐變革、特定細分領域的洞察以及區域差異,旨在幫助決策者在日益複雜的威脅和競爭環境中製定兼顧創新、合規性和成本的切實可行的藍圖。
DevSecOps 格局是正在重塑組織建構、保護和維運軟體系統的一系列變革的一部分。雲端原生架構和無伺服器運算模型的興起正在改變安全邊界,並要求安全控制更貼近程式碼和設定。基礎設施即程式碼 (IaC) 和策略即程式碼 (PaC) 範式已經成熟,能夠實現安全基準的自動化和一致性執行。同時,容器化和微服務架構也推動了對執行時間保護、供應鏈檢驗以及能夠在瞬態工作負載中動態運行的以身分為中心的存取控制的需求。
隨著架構的轉變,自動化和編配已成為大規模安全防禦的核心動力。安全編配與持續整合/持續交付 (CI/CD) 流水線整合,提供持續保障,而可觀測性和遠端檢測方法則加速了檢測和響應。模型驅動安全技術的日益普及以及機器學習在異常檢測中的選擇性應用,增強而非取代了人類的專業知識,使團隊能夠更有效地對優先級風險進行分類。此外,日益嚴格的監管預期和行業特定的合規性要求迫使組織採用持續合規框架,將控制證據與營運事件關聯起來。總而言之,這些變化需要新的能力、更緊密的跨職能協作以及一種將安全性視為軟體交付固有屬性而非外部查核點的營運思維。
2025年關稅及貿易政策調整的實施正對技術採購、供應商生態系統以及安全營運的經濟效益產生連鎖反應。關稅主導的硬體、專用安全設備和某些進口組件的成本壓力,正在加速企業重新評估籌資策略。企業因應措施包括:供應商組合多元化;在可行的情況下,優先選擇雲端原生和基於軟體的安全控制方案而非客製化硬體;以及協商以服務水準、維護和生命週期安全更新為重點的總體擁有成本協議。
此外,關稅也影響採購計畫和供應商選擇標準。更長的前置作業時間和潛在的海關問題促使採購和安全團隊在部署計畫中加入緩衝策略,並物流,從而降低單一來源供應的風險。此外,他們還建議與區域供應商和託管服務提供者建立策略夥伴關係,以實現堆疊部分在地化,並減少跨境摩擦。
從風險和管治的角度來看,不斷變化的關稅環境使得人們更加關注在補丁、責任和組件來源等方面的合約條款的清晰度。安全團隊正在加強對第三方依賴項的審查,擴展軟體材料清單(BOM) 的實踐,並將供應商績效指標與安全性和連續性義務掛鉤。簡而言之,貿易政策背景正在強化以軟體為中心的安全性、供應鏈透明度和採購與安全協調的營運必要性,從而推動架構、供應商策略和專案管治的實際協調。
精準的細分為DevSecOps領域的定向策略和投資決策提供了框架,每個細分維度都強調了製定不同營運和採購策略的必要性。產品/服務維度將「服務」(包括託管服務和專業服務)與「解決方案」(包括應用安全測試、雲端安全與合規、容器和微服務安全、身分和存取管理、事件偵測與回應以及安全軟體開發)區分開來。這種二分法凸顯了企業通常需要將以結果為導向的託管服務和專業解決方案能力相結合,以滿足即時的營運需求和長期的能力建設。
合規即代碼 (CaC)、基礎設施即代碼 (IaC)、策略即代碼 (PaC) 和安全性即代碼 (SaC) 實現了自動化、可測試且版本化的安全管理,並可直接整合到開發人員的工作流程中。這些類型顯示了工具鏈的成熟度,以及安全意圖在多大程度上以機器可讀工件的形式表達並永續檢驗。部署方式的分類反映了雲端和本地部署的差異。雲端部署傾向於動態的、以平台為中心的管理,而本地環境通常需要與傳統的身分、網路和終端架構緊密整合。
依組織規模分類,可以揭示大型企業和中小企業截然不同的需求和優先事項。大型企業傾向於投資跨領域編配、集中式管治和全面的遠端檢測平台,而中小企業則通常尋求能夠降低營運成本的承包解決方案和託管服務。最後,按行業垂直領域(銀行、金融服務、保險、教育、能源、公共、政府、公共部門、醫療保健、生命科學、IT、電信、製造業、媒體、娛樂以及零售和電子商務)分類,可以揭示管理體制、數據敏感性和營運關鍵性如何影響控制框架和供應商選擇。總而言之,這些分類揭示了市場參與企業必須透過靈活的交付模式、可互通的工具和情境感知型專業服務來滿足的各種需求和期望。
區域動態環境高度重視資料保護和事件報告,促使企業加速投資於持續合規和遙測驅動的偵測能力。此外,美洲地區擁有強大的託管服務市場,能夠支援那些希望外包部分保全行動,同時又能維持對自身策略方向控制的組織。
在歐洲、中東和非洲,監管疊加和跨境資料管治考量尤其重要,區域隱私和安全機制會影響架構選擇和供應商關係。這些地區的組織通常優先考慮資料駐留、正式的風險評估和標準化的認證路徑,因此對能夠證明符合當地要求的解決方案的需求也隨之成長。能夠在地化部署、支援多司法管轄區認證並提供清晰組件來源的供應商往往更受青睞。
亞太地區市場環境複雜多樣,雲端運算的快速普及與法規環境和人才流動的多樣性並存。在一些市場,對數位主權和在地化供應鏈的重視推動了對區域雲端能力和託管服務的投資。其他新興市場則優先考慮速度和可擴展的自動化,這為容器安全、身分驅動管理和開發者整合策略框架的發展創造了有利條件。在整個亞太地區,互通性、供應商靈活性以及對混合雲端和多重雲端拓撲的支援能力是選擇解決方案和服務供應商時的關鍵因素。
一些供應商專注於容器運行時保護和應用程式安全測試等深奧的技術領域,而其他供應商則致力於開發融合策略即程式碼、可觀測性和編配功能的整合平台。雲端供應商、安全軟體供應商和系統整合商之間的策略夥伴關係關係日益普遍,從而能夠提供捆綁式服務,簡化採購流程並加快價值實現速度。此外,託管服務供應商正在擴展其能力,為不具備內部規模的組織提供安全平台工程和持續合規性營運服務。
競爭優勢日益體現在可驗證的互通性、提供機器可讀控制的能力,以及與 CI/CD 工具鍊和可觀測性堆疊整合的清晰藍圖。提供開放 API、強大的 SDK 和預先建置的與常用開發者工作流程整合方案的公司,往往更容易獲得以工程師主導的買家的青睞。同時,專業服務公司和顧問公司正透過提供專注於開發者賦能、威脅建模和組織變革專案的轉型服務,開闢新的市場。在整個供應商格局中,以可組合性為驅動的供應商佔據主導地位,它們能夠使最佳組合的組件互操作,同時提供多層編配和管治,從而為複雜的企業帶來切實價值。
產業領導者需要將DevSecOps視為一門跨職能學科,而非一系列零散的解決方案。這首先需要獲得高階主管的支持,制定清晰的章程,明確可衡量的成果(例如縮短平均修復時間或提高CI/CD管線中自動化安全門的百分比),並協調預算和營運優先順序。同時,他們還需要投資於平台工程能力,提供預設安全的模板、檢驗的建造管線和可重複使用的強制執行模組,使開發團隊能夠快速回應,而無需重複造輪子。
在技術方面,應優先考慮支援機器可讀指標和與開發者工具鏈原生整合的解決方案,從而實現安全關卡的自動化和滲透性。當採購靈活性至關重要時,應優先選擇可組合的平台和提供開放API的供應商,以最大限度地減少供應商鎖定並支援異質基礎設施。從人才角度來看,應組成跨職能團隊,將安全專家與平台和開發者倡導者結合,以彌補能力差距,並透過實踐培訓推廣安全實踐。最後,應實施以結果而非投入為導向的管治模型:追蹤營運指標,檢驗持續合規性證據,並利用回饋循環來改善措施和自動化。採取這些切實可行的步驟,有助於領導者在保持敏捷性的同時,將創新速度與可接受的風險水準相匹配,並降低營運複雜性。
本分析的調查方法結合了定性和定量調查方法,以確保研究的嚴謹性和實用性。主要研究包括對安全、工程和採購領域的從業人員進行結構化訪談和諮詢,並輔以供應商簡報,以檢驗產品功能和藍圖意圖。次要研究則利用了廣泛的權威公共資源、監管指南、白皮書和技術文檔,以揭示新興趨勢和研發格局。
最初的假設源自於文獻綜述和探索性訪談,隨後透過專家專題研討會和後續調查進行完善,以協調不同的觀點。我們透過整合解決方案能力、交付模式和行業特定需求,建構了貫穿整個報告的統一分類體系,從而完成了細分映射。品管包括獨立的第三方技術評估、對供應商聲明的交叉檢驗以及匿名從業人員回饋。對於原始資料的完整性存在差異的情況,我們明確指出了研究的局限性。此外,我們的建議也充分考慮了組織成熟度、監管覆蓋範圍和基礎設施配置等方面的差異。
總之,雲端原生架構、自動化安全執行模式以及不斷演變的交易動態的整合,強化了DevSecOps在現代技術組織中的策略角色。將安全嵌入開發和維運流程,使企業能夠在不放棄風險控制的前提下加速創新,但這需要對平台能力、規範的安全執行機制以及跨職能技能進行嚴謹的投資。關稅和供應鏈環境進一步凸顯了以軟體為中心的安全性、供應商多元化以及將安全需求與商業條款相協調的籌資策略的必要性。
決策者應將DevSecOps視為一項長期轉型,而非一系列零散的計劃。持續改進,輔以遠端檢測、自動化檢驗和組織學習,能最大程度地提升系統的韌性和速度。透過將管治與開發者體驗結合,優先考慮可組合的解決方案架構,並建立在地化的供應和支援夥伴關係關係,企業能夠在應對監管和貿易逆風的同時,保持安全性和敏捷性。我們在此宣布的整合旨在幫助高階主管設定優先級,並指導制定兼顧短期風險緩解和永續能力建設的營運藍圖。
The DevSecOps Market is projected to grow by USD 16.67 billion at a CAGR of 11.53% by 2032.
| KEY MARKET STATISTICS | |
|---|---|
| Base Year [2024] | USD 6.96 billion |
| Estimated Year [2025] | USD 7.72 billion |
| Forecast Year [2032] | USD 16.67 billion |
| CAGR (%) | 11.53% |
The integration of development, security, and operations continues to move from a best-practice aspiration to an operational imperative for organizations navigating accelerated digital transformation. Modern engineering practices demand that security be baked into the software lifecycle rather than appended as an afterthought; this shift elevates the importance of cohesive toolchains, automated policy enforcement, and shared accountability across development, security, and operations teams. As organizations scale cloud-native architectures and embrace continuous delivery, the capacity to detect and remediate vulnerabilities earlier in the lifecycle becomes a critical differentiator in resilience and time-to-market.
Consequently, technology leaders, security architects, and product managers are rethinking governance models and procurement approaches to align risk management with rapid feature delivery. This evolution requires a nuanced orchestration of processes, people, and technology: platform teams must enable secure-by-default templates, security teams must codify policy in machine-readable formats, and development teams must adopt secure coding and automated verification without sacrificing velocity. The ensuing sections synthesize transformational shifts, policy disruptions, segmentation-specific insights, and regional nuances to help decision-makers craft pragmatic roadmaps that balance innovation, compliance, and cost in an increasingly complex threat and trade environment.
The DevSecOps landscape is undergoing a series of transformative shifts that are redefining how organizations build, secure, and operate software systems. The rise of cloud-native architectures and serverless compute models has shifted the security perimeter, requiring security controls to move closer to code and configuration. Infrastructure as code and policy-as-code paradigms have matured to enable automated, consistent enforcement of security baselines, and this has reduced human error while increasing the scalability of secure deployments. At the same time, containerization and microservices architectures have elevated the need for runtime protection, supply chain verification, and identity-centric access controls that operate dynamically across ephemeral workloads.
Parallel to these architectural shifts, automation and orchestration have become central enablers of defensive scale. Security orchestration integrates with CI/CD pipelines to provide continuous assurance, while observability and telemetry-driven approaches accelerate detection and response. The growing adoption of model-driven security and the selective use of machine learning for anomaly detection are augmenting human expertise rather than replacing it, enabling teams to triage prioritized risks more effectively. Furthermore, regulatory expectations and industry-specific compliance requirements are tightening, prompting organizations to adopt continuous compliance frameworks that link control evidence to operational events. Collectively, these shifts demand new competencies, tighter cross-functional collaboration, and an operational mindset that treats security as an intrinsic attribute of software delivery rather than an external checkpoint.
The introduction of tariffs and trade policy adjustments in 2025 has had a cascading effect on technology procurement, supplier ecosystems, and the economics of secure operations. Tariff-driven cost pressures on hardware, specialized security appliances, and certain imported components have accelerated the re-evaluation of sourcing strategies. Organizations are responding by diversifying supplier portfolios, favoring cloud-native and software-based security controls over bespoke hardware where feasible, and negotiating total-cost-of-ownership arrangements that emphasize service levels, maintenance, and lifecycle security updates.
Moreover, tariffs have influenced procurement timelines and vendor selection criteria. Longer lead times and potential customs complexities are prompting procurement and security teams to build buffer strategies into their deployment schedules and to prioritize suppliers with resilient logistics footprints. This has implications for secure architecture choices: teams often favor modular, container-based solutions and standardized platform stacks that can be provisioned across multiple infrastructure providers, thereby reducing exposure to single-source supply risks. In addition, the tariff landscape has encouraged strategic partnerships with regional providers and managed service vendors to localize parts of the stack and reduce cross-border friction.
From a risk and governance perspective, the tariff environment has led to greater attention to contractual clarity around patching, liability, and component provenance. Security teams are increasing scrutiny of third-party dependencies, expanding software bill-of-materials practices, and tying supplier performance metrics to security and continuity obligations. In short, the trade policy context has amplified the operational case for software-centric security, supply chain transparency, and procurement-security alignment, driving pragmatic adjustments in architecture, vendor strategy, and program governance.
Accurate segmentation provides the scaffolding for targeted strategy and investment decisions in the DevSecOps domain, and each axis of segmentation highlights distinct operational and procurement imperatives. The offering dimension separates Services-comprised of managed services and professional services-from Solutions, which include application security testing, cloud security and compliance, container and microservices security, identity and access management, incident detection and response, and secure software development. This dichotomy underscores that organizations often require a blend of outcome-oriented managed services and specialized solution capabilities to address both immediate operational needs and long-term capability building.
Complementing offering-based distinctions, the type segmentation differentiates generational approaches to policy enforcement and configuration management: compliance-as-code, infrastructure-as-code, policy-as-code, and security-as-code enable automated, testable, and versioned security controls that integrate directly into developer workflows. These types indicate the maturity of toolchains and the extent to which security intent is expressed in machine-readable artifacts that can be validated continuously. Deployment-mode segmentation contrasts cloud with on-premises approaches, with cloud deployments favoring dynamic, platform-centric controls and on-premises environments often requiring tighter integration with legacy identity, network, and endpoint architectures.
Organization-size segmentation separates the needs of large enterprises from those of small and medium-sized enterprises, revealing divergent priorities: large organizations tend to invest in cross-domain orchestration, centralized governance, and comprehensive telemetry platforms, while smaller organizations typically seek turnkey solutions and managed services that lower operational overhead. Lastly, industry vertical segmentation-spanning banking, financial services and insurance, education, energy and utilities, government and public sector, healthcare and life sciences, IT and telecom, manufacturing, media and entertainment, and retail and e-commerce-illuminates how regulatory regimes, data sensitivity, and operational criticality shape control frameworks and vendor selection. Taken together, these segmentation dimensions create a matrix of needs and expectations that market participants must address through flexible delivery models, interoperable tooling, and context-aware professional services.
Regional dynamics materially influence technology adoption patterns, regulatory pressures, and the ecosystem of providers available to organizations pursuing DevSecOps maturity. The Americas exhibit a high degree of cloud adoption and an active innovation ecosystem that encourages rapid tool development and integration. This region's regulatory landscape emphasizes data protection and incident reporting, which in turn accelerates enterprise investments in continuous compliance and telemetry-driven detection capabilities. Additionally, the Americas feature a robust managed services market that supports organizations seeking to outsource portions of their security operations while retaining control of strategic direction.
In Europe, the Middle East & Africa the regulatory overlay and cross-border data governance considerations are particularly salient, with regional privacy and security regimes influencing architectural choices and vendor relationships. Organizations in this region often prioritize data residency, formalized risk assessments, and standardized certification paths, which drives demand for solutions that can demonstrate compliance with local requirements. Suppliers that can localize deployments, support multi-jurisdictional attestations, and offer clear provenance of components tend to be favored.
Asia-Pacific presents a heterogeneous set of market conditions where rapid cloud adoption coexists with diverse regulatory environments and talent distribution. Some markets emphasize digital sovereignty and localized supply chains, prompting investments in regional cloud capabilities and managed offerings. Other markets in the region prioritize velocity and scalable automation, creating fertile ground for container security, identity-centric controls, and developer-integrated policy frameworks. Across all regions, interoperability, vendor flexibility, and the ability to support hybrid and multi-cloud topologies remain decisive factors in selecting solutions and service providers.
Key company dynamics reflect an ecosystem in which specialization and integration coexist: some vendors concentrate on deep technical domains such as container runtime protection or application security testing, while others pursue integrated platforms that merge policy-as-code, observability, and orchestration capabilities. Strategic partnerships between cloud providers, security software vendors, and systems integrators have become commonplace, enabling bundled offerings that streamline procurement and accelerate time-to-value. Additionally, managed service providers are expanding capabilities to offer secure platform engineering and continuous compliance as operational services for organizations that lack in-house scale.
Competitive differentiation increasingly hinges on demonstrable interoperability, the ability to deliver machine-readable controls, and a clear roadmap for integrating with CI/CD toolchains and observability stacks. Companies that provide open APIs, robust SDKs, and pre-built integrations into popular developer workflows tend to see better adoption among engineering-led buyers. Meanwhile, professional services firms and specialized consultancies are carving out niches by offering transformation services that focus on developer enablement, threat modelling, and organizational change programs. Across the vendor landscape, there is an observable trend toward composability-vendors that enable best-of-breed components to interoperate while providing orchestration and governance layers deliver tangible value to complex enterprises.
Industry leaders must approach DevSecOps not as a point solution but as a cross-organizational discipline that requires synchronized investments across people, processes, and technology. Begin by establishing executive-level sponsorship and a clear charter that defines measurable outcomes-such as reducing mean time to remediate or increasing the percentage of automated security gates in CI/CD pipelines-to align budget and operational priorities. Simultaneously, invest in platform engineering capabilities that provide secure-by-default templates, validated build pipelines, and reusable policy modules that allow development teams to move quickly without re-creating security controls for each initiative.
On the technology front, prioritize solutions that support machine-readable policies and native integration with developer toolchains, enabling security gates to be both automated and transparent. Where procurement flexibility matters, favor composable platforms and vendors that provide open APIs to minimize lock-in and to support heterogeneous infrastructure. From a talent perspective, build cross-functional squads that pair security specialists with platform and developer advocates to bridge competency gaps and to diffuse security practices through hands-on enablement. Finally, implement governance models that monitor outcomes rather than inputs: track operational metrics, validate continuous compliance evidence, and use feedback loops to refine policies and automation. These pragmatic steps will help leaders align innovation velocity with an acceptable risk posture while preserving agility and reducing operational complexity.
The research methodology for this analysis combined qualitative and quantitative research techniques to ensure rigor and practical relevance. Primary research included structured interviews and consultations with practitioners across security, engineering, and procurement functions, supplemented by vendor briefings to validate product capabilities and roadmap intent. Secondary research drew on a wide range of authoritative public-domain materials, regulatory guidance, whitepapers, and technical documentation to contextualize emerging patterns and regulatory developments.
Analysts employed a layered validation approach: initial hypotheses were developed from literature review and exploratory interviews, then refined through targeted expert panels and follow-up inquiries to reconcile divergent perspectives. Segmentation mapping was performed by aligning solution capabilities, delivery models, and industry-specific requirements to create a coherent taxonomy used throughout the report. Quality control measures included cross-validation of vendor claims against independent third-party technical assessments and anonymized practitioner feedback. Limitations of the study are transparently noted where primary data coverage was uneven, and recommendations are framed to accommodate variations in organizational maturity, regulatory exposure, and infrastructure composition.
In conclusion, the convergence of cloud-native architectures, automated policy paradigms, and evolving trade dynamics has reinforced the strategic role of DevSecOps in contemporary technology organizations. Embedding security into development and operations enables firms to accelerate innovation without relinquishing control over risk, but doing so requires disciplined investment in platform capabilities, codified policies, and cross-functional skills. The tariff and supply-chain environment has further emphasized the need for software-centric security, supplier diversification, and procurement strategies that align security obligations with commercial terms.
Decision-makers should view DevSecOps as a long-term transformation rather than a series of point projects. Continuous improvement, supported by telemetry, automated validation, and organizational learning, will yield the greatest returns in resilience and speed. By aligning governance with developer experience, prioritizing composable solution architectures, and building partnerships that localize supply and support, organizations can navigate regulatory and trade headwinds while maintaining a secure, agile posture. The synthesis presented here is intended to inform executive prioritization and to guide operational roadmaps that balance short-term risk mitigation with sustainable capability building.