![]() |
市场调查报告书
商品编码
1848842
无伺服器安全市场按服务类型、安全解决方案类型、部署模式、最终用户产业和组织规模划分 - 全球预测,2025-2032 年Serverless Security Market by Service Type, Security Solution Type, Deployment Model, End Use Industry, Organization Size - 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,无伺服器安全市场将成长至 250.2 亿美元,复合年增长率为 29.98%。
| 关键市场统计数据 | |
|---|---|
| 基准年 2024 | 30.6亿美元 |
| 预计年份:2025年 | 40亿美元 |
| 预测年份 2032 | 250.2亿美元 |
| 复合年增长率 (%) | 29.98% |
无伺服器运算透过抽象基础设施并加速价值实现,正在重塑企业设计、部署和保护数位服务的方式。这种演进要求安全措施从基于边界和主机的管理转向识别、运行时遥测和策略驱动的自动化。随着无伺服器运算的普及,安全领导者将面临新型运行时模型、分散式资料流和新兴攻击手法的整合,这需要对预防、侦测和復原能力进行新的整合。
因此,任何对无伺服器安全性的介绍都应强调从传统的以基础设施为中心的管理转向基于能力的保护,以适应持续交付和临时执行。安全负责人越来越需要将控制措施整合到开发平臺中,在各个功能中强制执行最小权限原则,并利用可观测性来侦测高度动态环境中的异常情况。在实践中,这意味着需要重新思考工程、保全行动和管治的职责,以便将安全性更早嵌入生命週期中,并实现威胁感知设计。
受技术成熟度、可组合架构和不断演变的监管环境的驱动,无伺服器安全格局正在发生显着变化。功能级抽象化和后端即服务 (BaaS) 模式加快了开发速度,同时也将风险分散到 API、身分架构和第三方整合。因此,安全负责人必须做出调整,优先考虑在服务和 API 边界运行的控制措施,同时保持对瞬态执行环境的可观测性。
同时,安全解决方案生态系统也在不断发展,以应对 API 安全问题,包括细粒度的存取控制、威胁检测和使用情况监控;合规性管理,包括审核、报告和规划编配;强大的静态和传输中资料加密,并辅以金钥管理;身份和存取管理,包括多因素执行验证、容器安全管理和单点登录;这种转变,加上对云端原生工具和传统安全堆迭编配的需求,正迫使企业重新思考其供应商选择标准、整合模型和内部营运模式。因此,投资可组合、自动化安全功能的企业将更有能力在保持发展速度的同时降低系统性风险。
到2025年,美国关税政策的累积影响将为依赖全球供应链、託管服务和软体授权的企业带来复杂的营运和策略考量。关税将影响供应商的采购决策、采购前置作业时间以及支撑云端服务供应商生态系统的硬体和配套服务的总拥有成本。虽然无伺服器运算减少了对本地伺服器的依赖,但供应商供应链中的许多环节——边缘硬体、用于金钥管理的安全元件以及第三方设备——仍然对贸易政策的变化十分敏感。
因此,安全采购团队需要重新评估供应商多元化、合约条款和库存策略,以降低关税带来的波动。这需要与负责人、法务和云端服务负责人密切合作,以了解转嫁成本、服务等级调整和区域部署经济性的潜在变化。此外,企业还需要评估策略选择,例如增加对公有云原生功能的依赖、重新平衡公有云、私有云和混合云部署,以及研究供应商在地化方案,以管理资料主权和合规性风险。简而言之,2025 年的关税趋势将促使安全和 IT 领导者将地缘政治和贸易因素纳入其架构规划、采购决策和长期弹性策略中。
细分洞察需要将结构分类转化为营运优先级,从而指导产品选择、整合工作和管治设计。在评估服务类型时,对比后端即服务 (BaaS) 和函数即服务 (FaaS) 可以凸显安全性挑战:后端即服务强调託管资料储存、存取模式和统一的身分层,而函数即服务则需要细粒度的执行时间保护、短期凭证和进阶遥测技术来侦测异常函数行为。在这些模型之间切换会改变控制措施的实施位置和事件回应的执行方式。
同样,对安全解决方案类型进行细分有助于明确功能优先顺序。 API 安全涵盖存取控制、威胁侦测和使用情况监控,成为保护连接无伺服器元件介面的主要控制平面。合规性管理(包括策略管理、审核和彙报)驱动着对不可变日誌、策略即程式码和可验证控制的要求。资料加密对于维护分散式功能的机密性至关重要,包括静态加密、传输中加密和金钥管理。身分和存取管理透过多因素身份验证、权限管理和单一登入支援安全的开发人员和执行时间存取。运行时保护包括容器安全、运行时应用程式自我保护和沙箱安全,为运行中的工作负载提供最后一道防线。透过检视混合云、私有云端云和公有云部署模型的细分情况,领导者可以确定哪些功能是原生功能,哪些功能是透过第三方控制强制执行的,以及整合工作的重点应该放在哪里。最后,按最终用户产业(银行、金融服务和保险、政府和公共部门、医疗保健、资讯科技和通讯、零售和电子商务)进行细分,可以发现不同的合规性、资料驻留和威胁概况要求。依组织规模(大型企业与小型企业)进行细分,也能凸显采购週期、内部能力以及对託管服务和客製化控制的接受度的差异。综合这些因素,您可以根据组织的风险承受能力和监管义务,精准地调整架构、控制措施和营运模式。
区域动态对无伺服器安全性的优先排序和实施方式有显着影响。在美洲,监管机构通常关注隐私、违规通知和智慧财产权保护,因此企业优先考虑资料加密、身分管治和强大的审核追踪。相反,欧洲、中东和非洲地区(EMEA)的监管预期和主权考量错综复杂,影响区域部署决策和更严格的政策控制框架。该市场通常要求资料驻留于欧洲或区域层面,并需要详细的合规性报告,这会影响供应商的选择和架构方案。
在亚太地区,云端运算的快速普及和管理体制的多样性,既为安全领导者带来了创新机会,也带来了挑战。许多亚太企业正努力平衡快速的数位转型时间表与日益完善的隐私法规以及对跨境资料流动的严格审查。因此,该地区的安全架构强调灵活的部署模式、强大的金钥管理策略以及能够适应混合云和本地化公共云端配置的执行时间保护。这些区域差异凸显了製定区域性安全策略的必要性,这些策略需要考虑到不同的监管环境、区域威胁情势以及云端原生安全实践成熟度的差异。
在无伺服器安全领域,各公司的策略体现了三大优先事项的整合:与云端原生平台深度整合、从 API 到运行时的持续增强,以及能够降低企业采用门槛的伙伴关係。许多领先供应商正在投资遥测整合、策略即程式码和以开发者为先的工作流程,以确保安全成为持续交付的一部分,而不是阻碍速度的因素。这一趋势还包括扩展产品组合,以提供兼顾预防性功能(例如存取控制和资料加密)以及侦测和回应功能(例如运行时应用程式自我保护和进阶威胁侦测)。
此外,竞争格局预示着相邻领域的整合趋势,因为供应商都在寻求全面覆盖 API 安全、身分和存取管理以及执行时间保护。同时,模组化厂商透过垂直产业产品实现差异化,为具有严格合规要求的产业提供预先建构的审核和报告范本以及特定区域的控制措施。安全厂商与云端供应商之间的伙伴关係日益成熟,因此能够实现更快的部署和更原生的控制平面。对于买家而言,评估供应商的蓝图至关重要,重点关注整合深度、对开放标准的承诺以及在保持操作简便性和强大管治的同时支援混合云端和多重云端拓扑的能力。
产业领导者必须采取务实且行动导向的方法,确保无伺服器架构的安全,从而在开发者敏捷性和强大的管治之间取得平衡。首先,要将安全性融入开发生命週期,实施安全防护措施、策略即程式码以及自动化测试,在部署前检验存取控制和加密。减少对长期凭证的依赖,建构以身分为先的方法,透过多因素身分验证、权限管理以及跨功能和后端服务的一致单点登入集成,强制执行最小权限原则。
此外,投资于端到端可观测性,将 API 使用情况、功能远端检测和基础设施事件关联起来,可确保威胁侦测具有上下文关联性,并能快速对事件进行分类。优先考虑运行时保护措施(例如容器安全、运行时应用程式自我保护、沙箱),以限制攻击视窗和横向移动。从采购角度来看,优先选择具有云端原生伙伴关係关係和开放整合模式的供应商,并对合约的资费和供应链弹性进行压力测试。最后,使管治和合规性与区域和特定产业需求保持一致,并参与持续学习和桌面演练,以检验在混合云、私有云和公有云端部署中的事件回应能力。
这些调查方法旨在结合质性和量化方法,提供切实可行且论证充分的分析。研究人员首先对来自安全、工程、采购和合规等领域的从业人员进行了访谈,评估了营运实务和供应商选择标准。此外,研究人员还对代表性架构、遥测模式和安全工具整合进行了技术审查,以检验关于控制措施部署和有效性的假设。
为确保上下文准确性,二级资讯来源包括供应商文件、已发布的技术标准、行业指南和法律规范。我们透过基于场景的分析进行交叉检验,检验了关税变化、区域监管差异和部署模式选择对安全架构和采购决策的影响。在整个研究调查方法中,我们强调可复製性、假设的透明度和实践相关性,以确保最终的建议和细分洞察能够应用于企业实施。
总之,确保无伺服器架构的安全性需要整合对开发者友好的管理、以身分为中心的存取控制、强大的加密以及根据部署和区域实际情况量身定制的自适应运行时保护。本文所述的变革性转变强调,安全不再是事后考虑的问题,而必须融入服务设计、持续交付和供应商选择的各个环节。那些采用策略即程式码、遥测主导侦测和跨职能管治的领导者,将更有能力兼顾速度和安全这两大目标。
展望未来,关税压力和区域监管差异将持续影响采购、部署和合规策略,凸显供应链感知型采购和在地化方案的重要性。透过应用细分洞察和切实可行的建议,企业可以建立一个稳健的架构,在保持创新的同时降低营运风险并改善管理体制。
The Serverless Security Market is projected to grow by USD 25.02 billion at a CAGR of 29.98% by 2032.
| KEY MARKET STATISTICS | |
|---|---|
| Base Year [2024] | USD 3.06 billion |
| Estimated Year [2025] | USD 4.00 billion |
| Forecast Year [2032] | USD 25.02 billion |
| CAGR (%) | 29.98% |
Serverless computing reshapes how organizations design, deploy, and protect digital services by abstracting infrastructure and accelerating time to value. This evolution requires security practices to shift from perimeter and host-based controls toward identity, runtime telemetry, and policy-driven automation. As adoption matures, security leaders face a convergence of new runtime models, distributed data flows, and emergent threat vectors that demand a fresh synthesis of prevention, detection, and resilience.
Consequently, the introductory framing of serverless security must underscore the transition from traditional infrastructure-centric controls to capability-based protection that aligns with continuous delivery and ephemeral execution. Security owners are increasingly expected to integrate controls into development pipelines, enforce least privilege across functions, and instrument observability to detect anomalies in highly dynamic environments. In practice, this means rethinking responsibilities across engineering, security operations, and governance to embed security earlier in the lifecycle and to operationalize threat-aware design.
The landscape of serverless security is undergoing transformative shifts driven by technology maturation, composable architectures, and heightened regulatory attention. Function-level abstraction and Backend as a Service paradigms accelerate development velocity, yet they also redistribute risk into APIs, identity fabrics, and third-party integrations. As a result, security leaders must adapt by prioritizing controls that operate at the service and API boundaries while maintaining observability across ephemeral execution contexts.
In parallel, the security solutions ecosystem is evolving to address API Security with granular access control, threat detection, and usage monitoring; compliance management with audit and reporting plus policy orchestration; robust data encryption both at rest and in transit complemented by key management; identity and access management featuring multi-factor authentication, privilege management, and single sign-on; and runtime protection that encompasses container security, runtime application self-protection, and sandboxing. These shifts necessitate orchestration across cloud-native tooling and traditional security stacks, prompting enterprises to reconceive vendor selection criteria, integration models, and internal operating models. Consequently, organizations that invest in composable, automated security capabilities will be better positioned to sustain velocity while reducing systemic risk.
The cumulative effects of tariff changes in the United States during 2025 introduce complex operational and strategic considerations for organizations reliant on global supply chains, managed services, and software licensing. Tariffs influence vendor sourcing decisions, procurement lead times, and the total cost of ownership for hardware and bundled services that underpin cloud provider ecosystems. Although serverless computing reduces dependency on on-premises servers, many elements of the vendor supply chain-edge hardware, secure elements used for key management, and third-party appliances-remain sensitive to trade policy shifts.
Consequently, security procurement teams must reassess supplier diversification, contractual terms, and inventory strategies to mitigate tariffs-driven volatility. This requires closer collaboration with procurement, legal, and cloud providers to understand pass-through costs, service level adjustments, and potential shifts in regional deployment economics. Moreover, organizations should evaluate strategic alternatives such as increased reliance on public cloud-native capabilities, a rebalanced mix between public, private, and hybrid deployments, and deeper scrutiny of vendor localization options to manage data sovereignty and compliance risks. In short, tariff dynamics in 2025 act as a forcing function for security and IT leaders to incorporate geopolitical and trade considerations into architecture planning, sourcing decisions, and long-term resilience strategies.
Segmentation insight requires translating structural categories into operational priorities that inform product selection, integration effort, and governance design. When assessing service type, the contrast between Backend As A Service and Function As A Service surfaces distinct security imperatives: Backend As A Service emphasizes managed data stores, access patterns, and integrated identity layers, whereas Function As A Service demands granular runtime protection, short-lived credentials, and elevated telemetry to detect anomalous function behavior. Transitioning between these models changes where controls must be enforced and how incident response is executed.
Equally, security solution type segmentation clarifies capability priorities. API Security-spanning access control, threat detection, and usage monitoring-becomes the primary control plane for protecting interfaces that stitch serverless components together. Compliance Management-encompassing audit and reporting plus policy management-drives requirements for immutable logs, policy-as-code, and demonstrable controls. Data Encryption in its full stack of at-rest encryption, in-transit encryption, and key management is essential for preserving confidentiality across distributed functions. Identity and Access Management, through multi-factor authentication, privilege management, and single sign-on, underpins secure developer and runtime access. Runtime Protection, which includes container security, runtime application self-protection, and sandbox security, provides the last line of defense for executing workloads. By reflecting on deployment model segmentation across hybrid cloud, private cloud, and public cloud, leaders can map which capabilities will be native versus applied through third-party controls and where integration effort will concentrate. Finally, end-use industry segmentation such as Banking Financial Services And Insurance, Government Public Sector, Healthcare, Information Technology And Telecom, and Retail And Ecommerce reveals differentiated compliance, data residency, and threat profile requirements, while organization size segmentation between Large Enterprises and Small And Medium Enterprises highlights variations in procurement cycles, in-house capability, and tolerance for managed services versus custom controls. Together, these dimensions enable a precise alignment of architecture, controls, and operating model to an organization's risk appetite and regulatory obligations.
Regional dynamics materially influence how serverless security practices are prioritized and implemented across jurisdictions. In the Americas, regulatory focus often converges on privacy, breach notification, and intellectual property protections, prompting organizations to emphasize data encryption, identity governance, and robust audit trails. Conversely, the Europe, Middle East & Africa region presents a mosaic of regulatory expectations and sovereignty considerations that drive localized deployment decisions and tighter policy management frameworks. Markets in this region frequently demand European or regional data residency and nuanced compliance reporting, which impacts vendor selection and architecture choices.
Across Asia-Pacific, rapid cloud adoption and diverse regulatory regimes create both innovation opportunities and complexity for security leaders. Many organizations in Asia-Pacific balance aggressive digital transformation timelines with developing privacy regimes and increasing scrutiny on cross-border data flows. Therefore, security architectures in this region place a premium on flexible deployment models, strong key management strategies, and runtime protections that can be adapted to hybrid and localized public cloud configurations. These regional distinctions underline the need for a geography-aware security strategy that accounts for regulatory variance, local threat landscapes, and differing maturity levels among cloud-native security controls.
Company strategies in the serverless security space reflect three converging priorities: deep integration with cloud-native platforms, expanded capabilities across the API-to-runtime continuum, and partnerships that reduce friction for enterprise adoption. Many leading vendors are investing in telemetry integration, policy-as-code, and developer-first workflows to ensure security becomes part of continuous delivery rather than an impediment to velocity. This trend also includes widening portfolios to offer both prevention-focused features-such as access control and data encryption-and detection and response capabilities like runtime application self-protection and advanced threat detection.
Moreover, competitive dynamics show consolidation in adjacent categories as vendors seek to cover API security, identity and access management, and runtime protection holistically. At the same time, modular players are differentiating through verticalized offerings aimed at industries with stringent compliance needs, providing prebuilt audit and reporting templates and region-specific controls. Partnerships between security vendors and cloud providers continue to mature, enabling faster deployment and more native control planes. For buyers, this implies evaluating vendor roadmaps for integration depth, commitment to open standards, and the ability to support hybrid and multi-cloud topologies while maintaining operational simplicity and strong governance.
Industry leaders must adopt a pragmatic, action-oriented approach to secure serverless architectures that balances developer agility with robust governance. Start by embedding security into the development lifecycle through guardrails, policy-as-code, and automated testing that validate access controls and encryption practices before deployment. Build identity-first approaches that reduce reliance on long-lived credentials and enforce least privilege using multi-factor authentication, privilege management, and single sign-on integrations that are consistent across functions and backend services.
Additionally, invest in end-to-end observability that correlates API usage, function telemetry, and infrastructure events so that threat detection is contextually aware and incidents are triaged rapidly. Prioritize runtime protection measures-container security, runtime application self-protection, and sandboxing-to limit exploitation windows and contain lateral movement. From a procurement perspective, favor vendors with deep cloud-native partnerships and open integration models, and stress test contracts for tariff and supply chain resiliency. Finally, align governance and compliance practices with regional requirements and industry-specific needs, and commit to continuous learning and tabletop exercises that validate incident response across hybrid, private, and public cloud deployments.
The research methodology underpinning these insights combines qualitative and quantitative approaches designed to produce actionable, defensible analysis. Primary interviews with practitioners across security, engineering, procurement, and compliance informed the assessment of operational practices and vendor selection criteria. These interviews were complemented by technical reviews of representative architectures, telemetry patterns, and security tool integrations to validate assumptions about control placement and efficacy.
Secondary sources comprised vendor documentation, public technical standards, industry guidance, and regulatory frameworks to ensure contextual accuracy. Cross-validation occurred through scenario-based analysis that tested the implications of tariff changes, regional regulatory variance, and deployment model choices on security architecture and procurement decisions. Throughout, the methodology emphasized reproducibility, transparent assumptions, and practitioner relevance to ensure the resulting recommendations and segmentation insights are practical for enterprise implementation.
In conclusion, securing serverless architectures demands a synthesis of developer-friendly controls, identity-centric access, robust encryption, and adaptive runtime protections aligned to deployment and regional realities. The transformational shifts described here underscore that security is no longer an afterthought; it must be integrated into the fabric of service design, continuous delivery, and vendor selection. Leaders who embrace policy-as-code, telemetry-driven detection, and cross-functional governance will be better positioned to manage the dual objectives of speed and safety.
Looking ahead, tariff pressures and regional regulatory divergence will continue to influence sourcing, deployment, and compliance strategies, reinforcing the importance of supply chain-aware procurement and localization options. By applying the segmentation insights and actionable recommendations, organizations can create defensible architectures that sustain innovation while reducing operational risk and improving regulatory posture.