![]() |
市场调查报告书
商品编码
1844397
DevSecOps 市场按产品、类型、部署方式、组织规模和产业划分 - 全球预测 2025-2032 年DevSecOps Market by Offering, Type, Deployment Mode, Organization Size, Industry Vertical - Global Forecast 2025-2032 |
||||||
※ 本网页内容可能与最新版本有所差异。详细情况请与我们联繫。
预计到 2032 年,DevSecOps 市场将成长至 166.7 亿美元,复合年增长率为 11.53%。
| 主要市场统计数据 | |
|---|---|
| 基准年 2024 | 69.6亿美元 |
| 预计年份:2025年 | 77.2亿美元 |
| 预测年份:2032年 | 166.7亿美元 |
| 复合年增长率 (%) | 11.53% |
对于加速数位转型的企业而言,开发、安全和维运的整合正从理想化的最佳实践逐渐转变为营运的必要条件。这种转变凸显了整合工具链、自动化安全策略以及开发、安全和维运团队之间课责共用的重要性。随着企业扩展云端原生架构并采用持续交付,在生命週期早期侦测和修復漏洞的能力已成为提升系统韧性和缩短产品上市时间的关键因素。
因此,技术领导者、安全架构师和产品经理正在重新思考管治模型和采购方法,以在风险管理和快速功能交付之间取得平衡。这种演变需要流程、人员和技术之间的微妙协调。平台团队必须启用预设安全模板,安全团队必须将实践规范化为机器可读格式,而开发团队必须在不牺牲速度的前提下采用安全编码和自动化检验。以下章节整合了转型转变、实践变革、特定细分领域的洞察以及区域差异,旨在帮助决策者在日益复杂的威胁和竞争环境中製定兼顾创新、合规性和成本的切实可行的蓝图。
DevSecOps 格局是正在重塑组织建构、保护和维运软体系统的一系列变革的一部分。云端原生架构和无伺服器运算模型的兴起正在改变安全边界,并要求安全控制更贴近程式码和设定。基础设施即程式码 (IaC) 和策略即程式码 (PaC) 范式已经成熟,能够实现安全基准的自动化和一致性执行。同时,容器化和微服务架构也推动了对执行时间保护、供应链检验以及能够在瞬态工作负载中动态运行的以身分为中心的存取控制的需求。
随着架构的转变,自动化和编配已成为大规模安全防御的核心动力。安全编配与持续集成/持续交付 (CI/CD) 流水线集成,提供持续保障,而可观测性和远端检测方法则加速了检测和响应。模型驱动安全技术的日益普及以及机器学习在异常检测中的选择性应用,增强而非取代了人类的专业知识,使团队能够更有效地对优先级风险进行分类。此外,日益严格的监管预期和行业特定的合规性要求迫使组织采用持续合规框架,将控制证据与营运事件关联起来。总而言之,这些变化需要新的能力、更紧密的跨职能协作以及一种将安全性视为软体交付固有属性而非外部查核点的营运思维。
2025年关税及贸易政策调整的实施正对技术采购、供应商生态系统以及安全营运的经济效益产生连锁反应。关税主导的硬体、专用安全设备和某些进口组件的成本压力,正在加速企业重新评估筹资策略。企业因应措施包括:供应商组合多元化;在可行的情况下,优先选择云端原生和基于软体的安全控制方案而非客製化硬体;以及协商以服务水准、维护和生命週期安全更新为重点的总体拥有成本协议。
此外,关税也影响采购计画和供应商选择标准。更长的前置作业时间和潜在的海关问题促使采购和安全团队在部署计画中加入缓衝策略,并物流,从而降低单一来源供应的风险。此外,他们还建议与区域供应商和託管服务提供者建立策略伙伴关係,以实现堆迭部分在地化,并减少跨境摩擦。
从风险和管治的角度来看,不断变化的关税环境使得人们更加关注在补丁、责任和组件来源等方面的合约条款的清晰度。安全团队正在加强对第三方依赖项的审查,扩展软体材料清单(BOM) 的实践,并将供应商绩效指标与安全性和连续性义务挂钩。简而言之,贸易政策背景正在强化以软体为中心的安全性、供应链透明度和采购与安全协调的营运必要性,从而推动架构、供应商策略和专案管治的实际协调。
精准的细分为DevSecOps领域的定向策略和投资决策提供了框架,每个细分维度都强调了製定不同营运和采购策略的必要性。产品/服务维度将「服务」(包括託管服务和专业服务)与「解决方案」(包括应用安全测试、云端安全与合规、容器和微服务安全、身分和存取管理、事件侦测与回应以及安全软体开发)区分开来。这种二分法凸显了企业通常需要将以结果为导向的託管服务和专业解决方案能力相结合,以满足即时的营运需求和长期的能力建设。
合规即代码 (CaC)、基础设施即代码 (IaC)、策略即代码 (PaC) 和安全性即代码 (SaC) 实现了自动化、可测试且版本化的安全管理,并可直接整合到开发人员的工作流程中。这些类型显示了工具链的成熟度,以及安全意图在多大程度上以机器可读工件的形式表达并可持续检验。部署方式的划分反映了云端和本地部署的差异。云端部署倾向于动态的、以平台为中心的管理,而本地环境通常需要与传统的身分、网路和终端架构紧密整合。
依组织规模划分,可以揭示大型企业和中小企业截然不同的需求和优先事项。大型企业倾向于投资跨领域编配、集中式管治和全面的远端检测平台,而中小企业则通常寻求能够降低营运成本的承包解决方案和託管服务。最后,按行业垂直领域(银行、金融服务、保险、教育、能源、公共、政府、公共部门、医疗保健、生命科学、IT、电信、製造业、媒体、娱乐以及零售和电子商务)划分,可以揭示管理体制、数据敏感性和营运关键性如何影响控制框架和供应商选择。总而言之,这些划分揭示了市场参与企业必须透过灵活的交付模式、可互通的工具和情境感知型专业服务来满足的各种需求和期望。
区域动态环境高度重视资料保护和事件报告,促使企业加速投资于持续合规和遥测驱动的侦测能力。此外,美洲地区拥有强大的託管服务市场,能够支援那些希望外包部分保全行动,同时又能维持对自身策略方向控制的组织。
在欧洲、中东和非洲,监管迭加和跨境资料管治考量尤其重要,区域隐私和安全机制会影响架构选择和供应商关係。这些地区的组织通常优先考虑资料驻留、正式的风险评估和标准化的认证路径,因此对能够证明符合当地要求的解决方案的需求也随之增长。能够在地化部署、支援多司法管辖区认证并提供清晰组件来源的供应商往往更受青睐。
亚太地区市场环境复杂多样,云端运算的快速普及与法规环境和人才流动的多样性并存。在一些市场,对数位主权和在地化供应链的重视推动了对区域云端能力和託管服务的投资。其他新兴市场则优先考虑速度和可扩展的自动化,这为容器安全、身分驱动管理和开发者整合策略框架的发展创造了有利条件。在整个亚太地区,互通性、供应商灵活性以及对混合云端和多重云端拓扑的支援能力是选择解决方案和服务供应商时的关键因素。
一些供应商专注于容器运行时保护和应用程式安全测试等深奥的技术领域,而其他供应商则致力于开发融合策略即程式码、可观测性和编配功能的整合平台。云端供应商、安全软体供应商和系统整合商之间的策略伙伴关係关係日益普遍,从而能够提供捆绑式服务,简化采购流程并加快价值实现速度。此外,託管服务供应商正在扩展其能力,为不具备内部规模的组织提供安全平台工程和持续合规性营运服务。
竞争优势日益体现在可验证的互通性、提供机器可读控制的能力,以及与 CI/CD 工具炼和可观测性堆迭整合的清晰蓝图。提供开放 API、强大的 SDK 和预先建置的与常用开发者工作流程整合方案的公司,往往更容易获得以工程师主导的买家的青睐。同时,专业服务公司和顾问公司正透过提供专注于开发者赋能、威胁建模和组织变革专案的转型服务,开闢新的市场。在整个供应商格局中,以可组合性为驱动的供应商占据主导地位,它们能够使最佳组合的组件互操作,同时提供多层编配和管治,从而为复杂的企业带来切实价值。
产业领导者需要将DevSecOps视为一门跨职能学科,而非一系列零散的解决方案。这首先需要获得高阶主管的支持,制定清晰的章程,明确可衡量的成果(例如缩短平均修復时间或提高CI/CD管线中自动化安全门的百分比),并协调预算和营运优先顺序。同时,他们还需要投资于平台工程能力,提供预设安全的模板、检验的建造管线和可重复使用的强制执行模组,使开发团队能够快速回应,而无需重复造轮子。
在技术方面,应优先考虑支援机器可读指标和与开发者工具链原生整合的解决方案,从而实现安全关卡的自动化和渗透性。当采购灵活性至关重要时,应优先选择可组合的平台和提供开放API的供应商,以最大限度地减少供应商锁定并支援异质基础设施。从人才角度来看,应组成跨职能团队,将安全专家与平台和开发者倡导者结合,以弥补能力差距,并透过实践培训推广安全实践。最后,应实施以结果而非投入为导向的管治模型:追踪营运指标,检验持续合规性证据,并利用回馈循环来改善措施和自动化。采取这些切实可行的步骤,有助于领导者在保持敏捷性的同时,将创新速度与可接受的风险水准相匹配,并降低营运复杂性。
本分析的调查方法结合了定性和定量调查方法,以确保研究的严谨性和实用性。主要研究包括对安全、工程和采购领域的从业人员进行结构化访谈和咨询,并辅以供应商简报,以检验产品功能和蓝图意图。次要研究则利用了广泛的权威公共资源、监管指南、白皮书和技术文檔,以揭示新兴趋势和研发格局。
最初的假设源自于文献综述和探索性访谈,随后透过专家专题研讨会和后续调查进行完善,以协调不同的观点。我们透过整合解决方案能力、交付模式和行业特定需求,建构了贯穿整个报告的统一分类体系,从而完成了细分映射。品管包括独立的第三方技术评估、对供应商声明的交叉检验以及匿名从业人员回馈。对于原始资料的完整性存在差异的情况,我们明确指出了研究的局限性。此外,我们的建议也充分考虑了组织成熟度、监管覆盖范围和基础设施配置等方面的差异。
总之,云端原生架构、自动化安全执行模式以及不断演变的交易动态的整合,强化了DevSecOps在现代技术组织中的策略角色。将安全嵌入开发和维运流程,使企业能够在不放弃风险控制的前提下加速创新,但这需要对平台能力、规范的安全执行机制以及跨职能技能进行严谨的投资。关税和供应链环境进一步凸显了以软体为中心的安全性、供应商多元化以及将安全需求与商业条款相协调的筹资策略的必要性。
决策者应将DevSecOps视为一项长期转型,而非一系列零散的计划。持续改进,辅以远端检测、自动化检验和组织学习,能最大程度地提升系统的韧性和速度。透过将管治与开发者体验结合,优先考虑可组合的解决方案架构,并建立在地化的供应和支援伙伴关係关係,企业能够在应对监管和贸易逆风的同时,保持安全性和敏捷性。我们在此宣布的整合旨在帮助高阶主管设定优先级,并指导制定兼顾短期风险缓解和可持续能力建设的营运蓝图。
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.