DevSecOps vs. DevOps is a conversation we consider settled—or at least we pretend to, hoping the rest of the industry will catch up.

Security had to be integrated. That’s the reality. What once was called DevSecOps has now largely been folded into DevOps itself—by necessity, not by marketing. When companies today post for “DevOps engineers,” what they’re really asking for is someone fluent in secure automation, policy-as-code, and compliance-aware deployment. The term DevSecOps has served its purpose. It redefined DevOps.

And yet, distinctions still matter. Some organizations and recruiters still treat security as a late-stage gate, not an embedded capability. So this article serves as both a post-mortem and a gentle reminder: the only real DevOps is the secure kind.

What Was DevOps?

DevOps originally referred to a set of practices that automate processes between software development and IT operations teams. The goal was to build, test, and release software faster and more reliably. This included:

• Enhanced collaboration across teams
• Extensive automation of build, test, and deployment processes
• Continuous Integration (CI)
• Continuous Delivery (CD)

Together, these practices shortened the SDLC and enabled faster responses to business needs. But security remained a separate function—rarely integrated early enough to prevent costly fixes.

The Shift Left Misunderstanding

DevSecOps emerged to close that gap, embedding security throughout the lifecycle—not bolting it on at the end. It introduced the idea of “Shift Left,” which originally encouraged teams to surface vulnerabilities earlier in development. But this was often misunderstood as front-loading security only in planning or design.

In reality, security needs to be present everywhere. It has to travel with the work, not just lead or follow it. In a continuous delivery loop, security isn’t a phase—it’s a posture. In reality, security needs to be continuous—woven through the feedback loops of modern delivery, neither ending nor merely initiating it.

DevOps transformed the delivery lifecycle by prioritizing automation, collaboration, and rapid iteration. But speed alone introduced a new problem: unmitigated risk. For many organizations, security was bolted on at the end—or handed off to isolated teams with little context or authority.

DevSecOps emerged not as a buzzword, but as a necessary correction. In regulated and complex environments—finance, government, healthcare—security isn’t optional, and treating it like an afterthought doesn’t scale. DevSecOps puts it where it belongs: inside the pipeline, embedded and automated.

What DevSecOps Actually Changes

One developer once joked to me—half-serious—“If there’s a security team at the end of the pipeline, why should I waste time writing secure code?” That mindset still lingers in some organizations. It’s not cynicism—it’s the result of poorly structured workflows that shift responsibility downstream. I’ve seen teams ship PoCs so quickly they missed basic access controls. Retrofitting security after the fact nearly broke their delivery model. Not because the engineers were careless, but because the process assumed someone else would catch it later.

And sometimes, that design isn’t accidental. At a major bank, I worked with an internal automation team tasked with overseeing a secure CI/CD rollout—exactly the kind of project meant to bridge silos. Ironically, the team lead actively resisted cross-team collaboration. When alignment was raised, his go-to line was “Lang leben die Silos”—long live the silos. That protectiveness may have come from past scars or internal politics, but it ran counter to the entire spirit of DevSecOps. It’s a reminder: you can have the tools, the automation, and the budget—but if the mindset stays siloed, the transformation fails.

I’ve seen organizations where developers openly bypassed security—not maliciously, but because someone else would “pick it up later.” One project I was called into had shipped a PoC so quickly it skipped even basic access controls. Post-hoc fixes were so disruptive they nearly had to rewrite the product from scratch. It wasn’t negligence—it was process design that made security someone else’s problem.

The real issue? Not speed. Not even pressure. It was silos—often misattributed to the principle of separation of concerns, which was never meant to justify separating security from delivery. DevSecOps breaks those silos by making security a continuous layer—not a step.

Unlike traditional DevOps, DevSecOps enforces security posture by design. Not by slowing down teams, but by making risk visible and manageable throughout the lifecycle. This means more than adding a scanner after a merge.

In mature pipelines, you’ll see security checks tied to:

• Code reviews (SAST, pre-commit secrets detection)
• Dependency management (SCA, SBOM policies)
• Infrastructure as Code validation (Terraform, Helm, Ansible scans)
• Container hygiene (base image vulnerabilities, signing, policies)
• Deployment gates (OPA, Kyverno, admission controllers)
• Runtime protection (RASP, EDR, behavioral anomaly detection)

The goal isn’t to flood developers with alerts—it’s to prevent the obvious failures from ever reaching staging, much less production.

The Cost of Getting It Wrong

Security delayed is cost multiplied. That’s not a metaphor—it’s quantifiable. Industry data shows how the expense of fixing vulnerabilities escalates the later they’re found.

The evidence overwhelmingly shows that delaying security drastically increases remediation costs and timelines. Consider these findings:

• Fixing a vulnerability during the coding or unit testing phase might cost around $50.
• Fixing that same vulnerability once it reaches production can skyrocket to $1,500 or more (a 30x increase), with some studies suggesting costs up to 640 times higher than fixing it during coding.
• Similarly, addressing a bug post-release can be four to five times more expensive than during the design phase, and up to 100 times more costly than if found during maintenance.
• Furthermore, one analysis indicated that delaying security-by-design practices by just one month across 100 applications could inflate remediation costs by over $416,000.

Relative Cost to Fix Vulnerabilities by SDLC Stage:

DevSecOps in Real Workflows

Security integration starts in design—not at deploy. At Zero One Logic, we see successful teams formalize security checkpoints at each layer:

• Design: Threat modeling and architectural risk reviews
• Code: Secure coding practices reinforced by SAST and peer review
• Build/Test: Container scanning, IaC scanning, dependency audits
• Deploy: Admission control, signed artifacts, policy enforcement
• Operate: Log integrity, alert correlation, behavioral baselines

It’s not exotic. It’s what resilience looks like.

Tangible Outcomes

For more on how security gets embedded into delivery, see our follow-up: Designing Secure, Custom CI/CD Runners.

Organizations that adopt DevSecOps frameworks aren’t just safer—they’re measurably more efficient:

• Sonatype reports 2.6× faster remediation in mature teams
• Puppet found 69% of teams deliver secure code faster post-DevSecOps
• Verizon DBIR links DevSecOps adoption to 50% fewer incidents
• Target realized a 40% cost reduction and 3% revenue lift from integrated practices
• stc Group cut app deployment times in half after implementing Red Hat-backed DevSecOps strategies

These aren’t outliers—they’re what happens when secure automation becomes standard.

But Do You Need All This for Every Project?

Not every app handles sensitive data. Not every repo is public. But threat actors rarely attack what’s obvious. Internal tools, staging environments, CI systems themselves—these often become the weakest link.

Another argument: why lower standards just because something is “internal” or “one-off”? Doing so trains teams to expect lax expectations. It encourages shortcuts. Keep the standards firm, and both your tools and your people stay hardened against complacency.

If you build software, and that software connects to anything of value, DevSecOps is no longer overkill. It’s the baseline.

Closing Perspective

If you’re navigating these challenges or planning your own secure delivery architecture, we’re happy to share what works—and what doesn’t. Reach out anytime.

If the term “DevSecOps” feels redundant today, that’s a good thing. It means the principles behind it were absorbed into modern DevOps practice. But we still see job descriptions and organizational charts that split security from delivery—or worse, skip it altogether.

This article is here as a reference point: a line in the sand for what DevOps must always include, even when the name no longer makes the distinction. In regulated, cloud-native, or fast-scaling environments, it’s not optional. And it’s not difficult—unless you wait too long to start.

Understanding the Foundations: What is DevOps?

Before diving into DevSecOps, let’s revisit its foundation. DevOps represents a set of practices that automate processes between software development and IT operations teams. Its primary goal is to build, test, and release software faster and more reliably.

By shortening the SDLC and improving reliability, DevOps helps align development efforts closely with business objectives. Key principles underpinning this approach include:

• Enhanced collaboration across teams
• Extensive automation of build, test, and deployment processes
• Continuous Integration (CI)
• Continuous Delivery (CD)

These practices work together to streamline development and enable quicker responses to market demands.

The Evolution: Enter DevSecOps

DevSecOps takes the DevOps foundation and adds the critical missing piece: security. It’s not just about adding security at the end; it’s about integrating security considerations and testing at every stage of the SDLC.

This embodies the “Shift Left” philosophy – addressing security from the earliest phases like planning, design, and coding, rather than waiting until just before release. Achieving this requires close collaboration between Development, Operations, and Security teams. The ultimate aim is to build security in from the ground up, making it easier and cheaper to identify and mitigate vulnerabilities early on.

DevOps vs. DevSecOps: Augmentation, Not Replacement

It’s important to view DevSecOps as an augmentation of DevOps, not a replacement. As the threat landscape constantly evolves, treating security as a separate, final step is no longer viable or responsible.

While the original DevOps principles dramatically improved speed and efficiency, the inherent risks of releasing vulnerable software demand integrated security. Consequently, many industry experts now view DevSecOps as simply “DevOps done right”, acknowledging security as a fundamental, non-negotiable aspect. The core DevOps values remain vital, but today’s reality demands a comprehensive DevSecOps approach to build secure and resilient software.

The High Cost of Delaying Security

Opting for a pure DevOps approach without proactive, integrated security is becoming increasingly risky. Releasing software with unaddressed vulnerabilities can lead to severe consequences, including:

• Costly and damaging data breaches
• Significant direct and indirect financial losses
• Irreparable reputational damage
• Potential legal liabilities and regulatory fines

The evidence overwhelmingly shows that delaying security drastically increases remediation costs and timelines. Consider these findings:

• Fixing a vulnerability during the coding or unit testing phase might cost around $50.
• Fixing that same vulnerability once it reaches production can skyrocket to $1,500 or more (a 30x increase), with some studies suggesting costs up to 640 times higher than fixing it during coding.
• Similarly, addressing a bug post-release can be four to five times more expensive than during the design phase, and up to 100 times more costly than if found during maintenance.
• Furthermore, one analysis indicated that delaying security-by-design practices by just one month across 100 applications could inflate remediation costs by over $416,000.

Relative Cost to Fix Vulnerabilities by SDLC Stage:

Benefits of Integrating Security into CI/CD (The DevSecOps Advantage)

Embedding security practices and tools directly into your CI/CD pipelines via a DevSecOps framework offers numerous tangible advantages:

• Continuous Vulnerability Assessment: Automated security scans run at multiple stages, catching issues early.
• Improved Vulnerability Management: Early detection allows for faster, cheaper remediation.
• Enhanced Compliance: Automated checks help ensure adherence to regulatory requirements and internal standards.
• Faster, More Reliable Releases: Integrating security prevents bottlenecks and costly rework caused by late-stage security findings.
• Higher Quality Applications: Security becomes an intrinsic part of the development process, leading to more robust products.
• Stronger Security Posture: Proactively addressing vulnerabilities significantly reduces the risk of successful attacks.
• Improved Collaboration: DevSecOps fosters shared responsibility and breaks down traditional silos between Dev, Sec, and Ops teams.

Implementing DevSecOps: Key Tools and Practices

A successful DevSecOps transformation requires a strategic approach, integrating appropriate security tools and practices throughout the SDLC:

• Plan & Design: Incorporate Threat modeling sessions and define clear Security requirements from the outset.
• Code: Utilize Static Application Security Testing (SAST) tools, implement Software Composition Analysis (SCA) to check dependencies, and promote Secure coding guidelines through training.
• Test: Employ Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), consider Interactive Application Security Testing (IAST), and perform regular Penetration testing.
• Deploy: Scan Infrastructure as Code (IaC) for vulnerabilities, implement Container vulnerability scanning, and manage Secrets securely.
• Operate & Monitor: Use Runtime Application Self-Protection (RASP) where applicable, implement robust Security monitoring & logging, and maintain Ongoing vulnerability management processes.

Crucially, tools alone aren’t enough. Success hinges on fostering a security-first culture, providing adequate training, and empowering development teams to take ownership of security within their workflows.

Are There Exceptions? When Might DevSecOps Be Overkill?

One might wonder if a less rigorous security approach suffices for certain scenarios, perhaps small, internal applications handling no sensitive data. While seemingly lower risk, even these applications can potentially serve as entry points for broader attacks on an organization’s network.

Furthermore, many industries face stringent compliance requirements (like HIPAA, PCI-DSS, GDPR) that mandate specific security practices regardless of the application’s perceived risk level. Therefore, while niche exceptions might theoretically exist, the pervasive nature of cyber threats and increasing regulatory pressures make a comprehensive DevSecOps approach the prudent and recommended path for nearly all modern software development projects.

The Wider World of *Ops: Beyond DevSecOps

The success of DevOps has inspired various specialized methodologies applying similar principles to different domains, often sharing the “Ops” suffix. Understanding their relationship to DevOps helps clarify the landscape:

• DevSecOps: As thoroughly discussed, this integrates Security into the core DevOps workflow. It’s widely considered the standard for modern, responsible DevOps.
• BizDevSecOps: Takes DevSecOps a step further by explicitly integrating Business goals and perspectives, ensuring alignment across Business value, Development speed, Operational stability, and Security. It promotes a shared vision across all four functions.
• MLOps (Machine Learning Operations): A specialized derivative tailored for the unique lifecycle of Machine Learning models. It adopts DevOps practices but adds specific tooling and processes for data/model versioning, drift detection, and model retraining.
• AIOps (AI for IT Operations): Focuses on using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to enhance and automate IT operations. It employs techniques like advanced observability, predictive analytics, and automated remediation to improve how IT teams monitor systems and respond to incidents, often complementing DevOps pipelines.
• DataOps (Data Operations): Applies Agile and DevOps principles (automation, collaboration, CI/CD) specifically to data pipelines. Its goal is to streamline data analytics, management, and delivery, much like DevOps streamlines software delivery.
• FinOps (Financial Operations): A cultural practice centered on bringing financial accountability and management to cloud spending. It requires collaboration between finance, technology, and business teams to optimize cloud costs, often interacting with DevOps teams regarding resource utilization.
• GitOps: An operational framework using Git as the definitive source of truth for managing infrastructure and application deployment declaratively. It applies DevOps practices like version control, CI/CD, and collaboration specifically to infrastructure automation using Git workflows.

In essence, while DevSecOps, BizDevSecOps, and MLOps directly evolve or specialize the core DevOps concept, others like AIOps, DataOps, FinOps, and GitOps adapt similar principles to distinct domains or provide specific implementation frameworks within or alongside DevOps.

Real-World Success with DevSecOps Adoption

The theoretical benefits translate into tangible results for many organizations:

• Companies like Netflix and Etsy famously leveraged DevOps and integrated security practices early on to achieve scale, speed, and a collaborative culture.
• Target reportedly reduced operational costs by 40% and increased online sales by 3% by adopting DevOps principles with security embedded.
• Capital One has been a proponent of proactively integrating security standards into their automated DevOps processes.
• stc Group successfully reduced the deployment time for new applications by 50% by strengthening their DevSecOps capabilities (cite: Red Hat).

Industry reports consistently validate these gains:

• Organizations mature in their DevSecOps practices remediate critical vulnerabilities 2.6 times faster than those less mature (cite: Puppet/Sonatype).
• A Sonatype survey found that 47% of respondents reporting an improved security posture and 69% achieving faster secure code delivery through DevSecOps (cite: Sonatype/Puppet).
• The Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR) has linked DevSecOps adoption to experiencing 50% fewer security incidents (cite: Verizon/Practical DevSecOps).

Conclusion: Security is Essential, Not Optional

In today’s development landscape, integrating security seamlessly into the DevOps workflow via DevSecOps is no longer just a good idea – it’s essential for building software that is secure, reliable, and efficient. As we’ve seen, delaying security considerations demonstrably increases costs, introduces significant delays, and exposes organizations to unacceptable risks.

The benefits are clear: automated security testing, better vulnerability management, streamlined compliance, faster release cycles, and ultimately, a stronger overall security posture. As cyber threats continue to evolve, security must be woven into the very fabric of software development from the start. The future truly belongs to those organizations that fully embrace DevSecOps.

What are your experiences with implementing DevSecOps? Share your thoughts or challenges in the comments below!