tài liệu ISTQB CTFL Foundation Syllabus 2011

Requiremen Qualifications Board tion-based or lence Partitio ary Value An on Table Tes Transition Te ase Testing -based or Wh ment Testing a on Testing an Structure-bas ce-based Tec

ftware

n Lev

Released rsion 201

d trademark

e authors forndation Leve

e authors for)

e authors for

k van Veene

he authors (T Pyhäjärvi, G

transfer the c

rs (as currentollowing cond

r training comISTQB are

at any adver

n for official

r group of inwritings if th

s of the syllaognized Natio

o other partie

its entirety, Software Te

of the Intern

r the update l)

r the update

r the update ndaal) Thomas MülleGeoff Thomp

copyright to t

t copyright hditions of usempany may uacknowledgertisement of accreditationdividuals ma

he authors abus

onal Board ms

or extracts mesting Qualificnational Softw

2011 (Thom

2010 (Thom

2007 (Thom

er (chair), Reson and Erik

the Internatioolders) and Ie:

use this sylla

ed as the sosuch a train

on of the tra

ay use this sand the ISTmay translate

made, if the scations Boarware Testing

abus as the bource and coning course maining matersyllabus as t

hair), Armin B

hair), Dorothy

grid Eldh, Dondaal)

re Testing Qu

he future cop

basis for a traopyright ownmay mentionrials to an Ithe basis for nowledged a

us and licens

knowledged

er called IST

ns Board, Friedenberg

Beer, Martin

y Graham, D

rothy Graha

ualifications pyright holde

aining courseers of the sy

n the syllabuISTQB recoarticles, boo

e if the yllabus

us only gnized oks, or

ce and bus (or

“LehrplanISEB Sof

25 Febru

78

s

Tester Founance ReleaseTester Founance ReleaseTester Founance ReleaseTester Founyllabus Foun

n Grundlagenftware Testinary 1999

dation Level

e – see Appedation Level

e – see Appedation Level

e dation Leveldation Level

n des Softwa

ng Foundatio

31-Mar

l Syllabus endix E – Re

l Syllabus endix E – Re

l Syllabus

l Syllabus Version 2.2 are-testens“

Table

Acknowl

Introduct

Purpo

The C

Learn

The E

Accre

Level

How t

1.1 

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.2 

1.3 

1.4 

1.4

1.4

1.4

1.4

1.4

1.5 

1.6 

2.1 

2.1

2.1

2.1

2.2 

2.2

2.2

2.2

2.2

2.3 

2.3

2.3

2.3

2.3

2.4 

3.  Sta

3.1 

3.2 

3.2

3.2

3.2

3.2

3.3 

4.1 

4.2 

of Conte

edgements

tion to this S ose of this Do Certified Test ning Objective Examination editation

of Detail

this Syllabus ndamentals o Why is Te 1  Softwa 2  Causes 3  Role of 4  Testing 5  How M What is T Seven Te Fundame 4.1  Test Pl 4.2  Test An 4.3  Test Im 4.4  Evalua 4.5  Test Cl The Psych Code of E sting Throug Software .1  V-mode 2  Iterative 3  Testing Test Leve 2.1  Compo 2.2  Integra 2.3  System 2.4  Accept Test Type 3.1  Testing 3.2  Testing 3.3  Testing 3.4  Testing Maintenan atic Techniqu Static Tec Review P 2.1  Activitie 2.2  Roles a 2.3  Types o 2.4  Succes Static Ana st Design Te The Test Categorie ents

Syllabus

ocument

ter Foundatio es/Cognitive

is Organize of Testing (K esting Neces re Systems C s of Software f Testing in S g and Quality uch Testing esting? (K2) sting Princip ntal Test Pro anning and C nalysis and D mplementatio ting Exit Crit losure Activit hology of Te Ethics

ghout the Sof Developmen el (Sequentia e-incrementa g within a Life els (K2)

onent Testing ation Testing m Testing (K2 ance Testing es (K2)

g of Function g of Non-func g of Software g Related to nce Testing ( ues (K2)

chniques and rocess (K2) es of a Form and Respons of Reviews ( ss Factors fo alysis by Too echniques (K Developmen es of Test De

on Level in S Level of Kno

d

K2)

sary (K2)

Context (K1) e Defects (K2 Software Dev y (K2)

is Enough?

ples (K2)

ocess (K1)

Control (K1) Design (K1) on and Execu teria and Rep ties (K1)

sting (K2)

ftware Life C nt Models (K2 al Developm al Developm e Cycle Mod

g (K2)

(K2)

2)

g (K2)

n (Functional ctional Softw e Structure/A Changes: Re (K2)

d the Test Pr

mal Review (K sibilities (K1) (K2)

or Reviews (K ols (K2)

K4)

nt Process (K esign Techniq

Software Tes owledge

)

2)

velopment, M

(K2)

ution (K1)

porting (K1)

Cycle (K2)

2)

ent Model) ( ent Models ( el (K2)

Testing) (K2 ware Characte Architecture ( e-testing and

rocess (K2)

K1)

)

K2)

K3)

ques (K2)

ting

Maintenance

K2)

(K2)

2)

eristics (Non Structural Te d Regression

and Operati

n-functional T esting) (K2) n Testing (K2

ons (K2)

Testing) (K2)

2)

7 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

9 

9 

10 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

15 

15 

16 

16 

16 

18 

20 

21 

22 

22 

22 

22 

24 

24 

25 

26 

26 

28 

28 

28 

29 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

33 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

Version 2

© Internationa

4.3 

4.3

4.3

4.3

4.3

4.3

4.4 

4.4

4.4

4.4

4.5 

4.6 

5.1 

5.1

5.1

5.2 

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.3 

5.3

5.3

5.3

5.4 

5.5 

5.5

5.5

5.6 

6.1 

6.1

6.1

6.1

6.1

6.1

6.1

6.1

6.1

6.2 

6.2

6.2

6.3 

Stand

Books

Histor

Objec

Objec

Novem

Entry

2011

al Software Testing Q Specificat 3.1  Equiva 3.2  Bounda 3.3  Decisio 3.4  State T 3.5  Use Ca Structure-4.1  Statem 4.2  Decisio 4.3  Other S Experienc Choosing st Managem Test Orga 1  Test O 2  Tasks o Test Plan 2.1  Test Pl 2.2  Test Pl 2.3  Entry C 2.4  Exit Cr 2.5  Test Es 2.6  Test St Test Prog 3.1  Test Pr 3.2  Test Re 3.3  Test Co Configura Risk and T 5.1  Project 5.2  Produc Incident M ol Support fo Types of T 1  Tool Su 2  Test To 3  Tool Su 4  Tool Su 5  Tool Su 6  Tool Su 7  Tool Su 8  Tool Su Effective U 2.1  Potenti 2.2  Specia Introducin ferences

dards

s

pendix A – S ry of this Doc ctives of the F ctives of the I mber 2001)

Requiremen

Qualifications Board tion-based or lence Partitio ary Value An on Table Tes Transition Te ase Testing ( -based or Wh ment Testing a on Testing an Structure-bas ce-based Tec Test Techni ent (K3)

anization (K2 rganization a of the Test L ning and Est anning (K2) anning Activ Criteria (K2) iteria (K2)

stimation (K2 trategy, Test gress Monitor rogress Mon eporting (K2 ontrol (K2)

ation Manage Testing (K2) t Risks (K2) ct Risks (K2) Management or Testing (K2 Test Tools (K upport for Te ool Classifica upport for Ma upport for Sta upport for Te upport for Te upport for Pe upport for Sp Use of Tools al Benefits a l Considerat ng a Tool into

Syllabus Bac cument

Foundation C International

nts for this Qu

r Black-box T oning (K3)

nalysis (K3)

sting (K3)

sting (K3)

(K2)

hite-box Tec and Coverag nd Coverage sed Techniqu chniques (K2 iques (K2)

2)

and Independ Leader and T timation (K3)

vities (K3)

2)

t Approach (K ring and Con itoring (K1)

)

ement (K2)

(K3)

2)

K2)

esting (K2)

ation (K2)

anagement o atic Testing est Specificat est Execution erformance a pecific Testin s: Potential B and Risks of ions for Som o an Organiz

kground

Certificate Q Qualification

ualification

Page 5 of 7 Techniques (

hniques (K4 ge (K4)

e (K4)

ues (K1)

2)

dence (K2)

Tester (K1)

)

K2)

ntrol (K2)

of Testing an (K1)

tion (K1)

n and Loggin and Monitorin ng Needs (K1 Benefits and Tool Suppor me Types of T zation (K1)

ualification

n (adapted fr

78

(K3)

4)

nd Tests (K1)

ng (K1)

ng (K1)

1)

Risks (K2)

rt for Testing Tools (K1)

rom ISTQB m

)

(for all tools

meeting at So

31-Mar

s) (K2)

ollentuna,

r-2011 40 

40 

40 

40 

41 

41 

42 

42 

42 

42 

43 

44 

45 

47 

47 

47 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

50 

50 

51 

51 

51 

51 

52 

53 

53 

53 

55 

57 

58 

58 

58 

59 

59 

59 

60 

60 

60 

62 

62 

62 

64 

65 

65 

65 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

Level

Level

Level

Level

Found

10

10

10

10

Relea

Relea

13. 

ground and H

pendix B – L

1: Rememb

2: Understa

3: Apply (K3

4: Analyze (

Appendix C –

dation Syllab

.1.1  Genera

.1.2  Curren

.1.3  Learnin

.1.4  Overall

Appendix D –

Appendix E –

ase 2010

ase 2011

Index

History of the Learning Obje er (K1)

nd (K2)

3)

(K4)

– Rules App bus

al Rules

t Content

ng Objectives l Structure

– Notice to T – Release N

e Foundation ectives/Cogn

plied to the IS

s

Training Prov otes

n Certificate i nitive Level o

STQB

viders

n Software T of Knowledge

Testing

e

68 

69 

69 

69 

69 

69 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

73 

74 

74 

74 

76 

anks the revie

on, and Won

ck, Julie Gar Ulrich, Erik

of the syllabu

re Testing Qur), Rahul Veack, Mette BMeile PosthumNational Boa

re Testing Qur), Dorothy G

ew team (Hanil Kwon) and

re Testing Qur), Rex Black

d Erik van Ve

ualifications edenberg Trdiner, Judy van Veenen

s

ualifications rma, Martin KBruhn-Peders

ma, Hans Scards for theirualifications Graham, Debans Schaefer

d all the Natiualifications

k, Sigrid Eldheenendaal an

Page 7 of 7

Board WorkThe core teamMcKay, Tuuldaal) and all

Board WorkKlonk and Arson, Debra Fchaefer, Step

r suggestionsBoard Workbra Friedenb

r, Stephanie onal BoardsBoard Work

ing Group Formin Beer TFriedenberg, phanie Ulrich

s

ing Group Foerg, and ErikUlrich, Meilefor their suging Group FoGraham, Klau

w team and a

oundation Lereview team

en, Eric Riou oards for the

oundation LeThe core teamKlaus Olsen, Pete William

oundation Le

k van Veene

e Posthuma, ggestions

oundation Le

us Olsen, Maall National B

31-Mar

evel (Edition

m (Dan Almog

du Cosquiersuggestions

evel (Edition aaret PyhäjärBoards for th

r-2011

2011):

g,

r Hans for

2010):

ay,

2007): core

2005): rvi, eir

e syllabus wstory and ba

Tester Fo

el qualificatio

as testers, teand software

ts a basic undevelopmen

n as part of a

or in a public

m

Board may aoviders shoutation An ac

n ISTQB exatraining prov

s Syllab

ent

the Internati

e Testing Quraining providdetermine awill help candackground of

undation

on is aimed aest analysts,developers

nderstanding

nt managers, dation Certif

an accreditedexam) Com

ccredit trainiuld obtain accccredited couamination as viders is give

us

onal Softwaralifications Bders and to dappropriate teidates in the

f the syllabus

Level in

at anyone inv, test enginee This Founda

of software business anficate will be

evel of K

ction in this s

ectives are gpter heading

s

n will be base

of material baminable

oice

d training coumpletion of a

ng providerscreditation gurse is recogpart of the c

en in Append

re Testing QBoard (ISTQBderive examieaching meth

ir preparatio

s can be foun

Software

volved in softers, test consation Level qtesting, suchnalysts, IT dirable to go on

urse or taken

an accredited

s whose couruidelines frognized as conourse

dix D

ualification aB) provides ination questhods and pro

n for the exa

nd in Append

e Testing

tware testingsultants, testqualification i

h as project mrectors and m

at the Founda

t to the Natiotions in their oduce courseamination

dix A

g This includ

t managers,

is also appromanagers, qmanagemenr-level softwa

s follows:

(K1), even if

wers to ection of this

ntly (e.g., at aurse is not a

follows this

or body thathis syllabus,

ation onal local eware

des user opriate uality

t are

not

s

an pre-

t and

at students mthe key conc

t is not a des

be covered in

bus is Or

chapters Thhat is covere

roughout

that Chapternot K3), and chapter themount of time

e section

s allows interllabus consisves describinincluding a dknowledge amust be ablecepts to teac

ng the intentiodescription, aarea, describ

ftware Li

ing objective

d to take 115mber of sectioSubsections

78

onsistent tea

on of the Fouand referencbing the cogn

d understandsources such

owledge areaing courses

ach chapter specifies the

fe Cycle

es of K1 (ass

5 minutes to ons Each sethat do not h

ching and exundation Levces to additionitive learnin

31-Mar

xamination Ivel

as the learnigiven are inc

r-2011

n

if and

e why testingtes to higherand compareand bug, usi

ing? (K2)

he common oexamples fo2)

g is part of qu

r quality (K2)

e the terms eing examples

objectives of

r the objectivfrom debugg

s (K2)

f testing (K1)ves of testingging (K2)

2)

f Testing

ng the compl

defect in sof(K2)

ct and its effeving examplence and givefault, failure

g in different

d respective t

e the succeseloper (K2)

15

letion of each

ftware can caects (K2)

ife

osure

of Softwar

make an erroent If a defechouldn’t), canot all defec

se human benfrastructuresed by enviro pollution caare condition

Testing in

systems and

d contribute tosystem is re

y also be req

and Qualit

ng, it is poss

nd non-functimaintainabiliore informatuality’ (ISO 9nfidence in thasses reduce

of the softwarearned from cts, processe

eings are fal

e, changing tonmental con

ty (K2)

sible to measional softwar

ty and portabtion on softw126)

he quality of t

es the overal

re system incprevious pro

es can be impnce, improve

one of the qunalysis)

ld even caus

s (K2)

which produexecuted, th

re Defects i

lible and bectechnologiesnditions as w

ts in firmwar

Developm

ion can help

of the softwperational us

et contractua

sure the qual

re requiremebility) For mare characte

the software

l level of riskcreases wheojects By unproved, whicthe quality o

re or influenc

ment, Main

to reduce thare system,

se

al or legal req

lity of softwaents and charore informateristics see ‘S

if it finds few

k in a system

en those defederstanding

t (fault, bug)

ay fail to do wsystems or d

s time press

ny system intmple, radiati

w or no defec

m When testiects are fixedthe root cauould prevent tems This is

s (i.e., alongs

31-Ma

20 minut

nking) to consnot work as ding loss of

in the prograwhat it shouldocuments m

sure, complexteractions

ion, magnetistion of softwa

cts A proper

ng does find

d

ses of defecthose defect

x

sm, are by

ring

pecific

und,

ty, sting

g is Enoug

ough should project constr

information t

m being teste

gh? (K2)

take accounraints such a

informed deent step or h

uding technic

k is discussed

cisions abouhandover to

cal,

d

ut the

ment and tes

can have the

g and static termation that csting process

e following obnce about theation for deccts

s and activitiesign) can hequirements) athe code

in testing taknent, integratssible so thatthe main obje

it has met thality of the sorisk of releasdefects have

he main obje

ng are differevelopment ac

ng and execprocess and been completducting staticesting can bcan be usedses

bjectives:

e level of quacision-making

es involved inelp to preventand the ident

ke different otion and syst

t defects in thective may b

he requiremeoftware (with ing the systebeen introduective may b

ent Dynamicctivity that fin

r ensures tha

is usually tesesting activitie

objectives intotem testing),

he software a

be to confirm ents In some

no intention

em at a givenuced during d

e to assess s

c testing can nds, analyze

at the fix doesters test and

er test, and fialso includes

means for acboth the syst

tests early in

m being intro

d resolution o

o account Fthe main obare identifiedthat the sys

e cases the m

of fixing defe

n time Maintdevelopmensystem chara

show failure

s and remov

es indeed res

d developersined in Secti

s, i.e., execu

nclude plann

ng results, evinalizing or c

s reviewing d

chieving simtem being tes

the life cycleoduced into c

of issues also

For example, bjective may

d and can betem works amain objectivects), to givetenance testi

t of the chanacteristics su

es that are caves the causesolve the fail

s debug

on 1.4

31-Ma

30 minut

uting the softw

ning and contvaluating exitcompleting cldocuments

milar objectivested and the

e (verifying tcode Review

aused by def

e of the failurure The

es,

e

he

ws of vent

ment

as

to may

n to ludes bility or

fects

re

g shows pre

at defects arity of undisco

of of correctn

ustive testin

all combinatiohaustive test

cide paradox

repeated ovdefects To o

d, and new a

em to find po

g is context

rently in diffe-commerce s

nce-of-errors

efects does nons

g is imposs

ons of inputsting, risk ana

vities shall b

be focused

roportionally dules usuallyfor most of t

x

ver and over overcome thiand different tentially mor

t dependent

erent contextsite

sible

s and preconalysis and pri

e started as

on defined o

to the expec

y contains mothe operation

again, event

is “pesticide tests need to

early as posobjectives

cted and lateost of the defnal failures

tually the samparadox”, te

ot feasible ex

d be used to

ssible in the s

r observed dfects discove

st cases will

ed to be regudifferent parts

are is tested

not fulfill the

tes

g cts are

ial

g

system

y of pre-

no ularly

s of

users’

nning and

activity of deobjectives anngoing activitiations from

d design actiest basis (suc architecturebility of the teprioritizing tesucture of therioritizing higssary test da

st environmectional tracea

ftware complies g., software com are defined to re

Test Pro

exit criteria, icution, test l

s test executiplanning the

onsists of the

ecution eporting

e activities in thin the cont

d Control (

efining the ob

nd mission

ty of comparthe plan It inorder to contrning takes in

are defined in

Design (K

activity duringcases

ivity has the

ch as require

e, design, inteest basis and

st conditions

e software

gh level test c

ta to supportent setup andability betwee

s or must comply mplexity, risk as eflect the importa

following ma

the processext of the sy

(K1)

bjectives of te

ing actual prnvolves takinrol testing, thnto account t

n Chapter 5 o

K1)

g which gene

following maements, softwerface specif

d test objectsbased on ancases

t the test con

d identifying

en test basis

y with a set of s ssessment, safe ance of the soft

78

K1)

ression testin, test proced

e effective anning test cas

ain activities

may overlapstem and the

s nalysis of tes

nditions and any requiredand test cas

stakeholder-sele ety level, securit tware to its stak

ng, test basisdure, test pol

nd efficient, tses, preparin

ected software a

ty level, desired keholders.

31-Ma

35 minut

s, test conditicy, test suite

test plans sh

ng for execut

ce concurrenusually requir

on of test ac

and reportinmeet the mis

ld be monitororing and con

ntly red

ctivities

ng the ssion red ntrol

d into

n,

-based

ating test suit

fying that the

e test environdating bi-direrocedures ei

ce come of test ools and test

al results withpancies as inode, in specictivities as aest that previo

st and/or exechanged areion testing)

ng Exit Cr

ia is the activuld be done f

ia has the fo

gs against th

re tests are nmmary repor

sure Activ

s collect datanumbers Teseleased, a teenance relea

on and Ex

on is the actrticular order

t up and the

on has the fo prioritizing test proceduremated test scrtest procedunment has beectional tracether manuallexecution antware

h expected rncidents andfied test data

a result of actously failed iecution of tes

as of the sof

riteria and

vity where tefor each test llowing majo

he exit criterianeeded or if t

rt for stakeho

vities (K1)

a from comp

st closure acest project is ase has been

xecution (

ivity where te

r and includintests are runollowing majotest cases (in

es, creating tripts

ures for efficieen set up coeability betw

ly or by using

nd recording results

d analyzing th

a, in the test tion taken fo

n order to costs in order tftware or tha

Reporting

est executionlevel (see S

or tasks:

a specified inthe exit criterolders

pleted test acctivities occurcompleted (o

g test executthe identities

hem in orderdocument, o

r each discreonfirm a fix (c

to ensure tha

t defect fixin

g (K1)

is assessedSection 2.2)

n test planninria specified

ctivities to co

r at project m

or cancelled

res or scriptsinformation

identification

d, optionally,cution basis and tetion tools, ac

s and versio

r to establish

or a mistake epancy, for econfirmation

at defects ha

g did not unc

d against the

ng should be ch

nsolidate expmilestones su), a mileston

s are specifieneeded for t

n of test data preparing te

est cases ccording to th

ns of the sof

h their cause

in the way thexample, re-testing), exe

ve not been cover other

defined

hanged

perience, uch as when

e has been

ed by test

a) est

he ftware

(e.g.,

he test

ecution

a

e acceptancerchiving testw

e testware to

ns learned toation gathere

e following mverables havaising change

e of the systeware, the tes

main open est infrastruct

w by trained avel of testingndependenc

d failures Indently find ma

of product riseye, attentio

to base erroailures are coysts, designeell as in testineader need g

d risks in a c

an help them

y later, and rblems may oc

ce (avoiding tdependenceany defects i

ow to high:

n(s) who wroerson(s) (e.gs) from a diff., usability ors) from a diffody)

y objectives

holders, for e

t is importanmay be perc

en seen as a sks Looking

on to detail, g

or guessing

ommunicateers and deve

ng

good interperconstructive w

m improve thereduce risks

ccur, particuowever, ther

d others:

sting (K

viewing is diffare able to teelp focus effonal testing r

the author bi

e is not, howe

n their own cote the softwg., from the dferent organi

r performancferent organi

People tendexample, to f

t to clearly sceived as cridestructive afor failures igood commu

d in a constrlopers can b

rsonal skills way For theeir skills Defe

larly if tester

re are severa

2)

ferent from thest their own fort and provresources In

as) often maever, a replaccode Severaware under tedevelopmentizational grou

ce test speciaization or com

d to align thefind defects otate the objeticism againsactivity, even

n a system runication with

ructive way,

be avoided T

to communic author of thects found a

s are seen o

al ways to im

hat used whicode, but seide additionandependent t

akes the testecement for fa

al levels of in

st (low level

t team)

up (e.g., an ialists) mpany (i.e.,

eir plans with

or to confirmectives of tes

st the produc

n though it isrequires curio

h developme

bad feelings This applies t

cate factual i

e software o

nd fixed duri

only as messmprove comm

25 minut

ile developineparation of t

al benefits, sutesting may b

er more effecamiliarity, anndependence

of independindependentoutsourcing

the objectiv

m that softwarting

ct and agains

s very construosity, professent peers, an

between the

to defects fou

nformation a

or document, ing testing w

engers of munication an

tes

g this uch as

be

ctive

nd

e can ence)

d

e und

about will

nd

d how the otother person

r than battles

e product in aample, writether person f

n has unders

Page 19 of

s – remind e

a neutral, fac objective anfeels and whstood what yo

78

everyone of thct-focused w

as they do

d and vice ve

31-Ma

goal of betteriticizing the

oftware testeOYER - Certmployer, cons

d software test) meet the

ed software t

ertified softwa

he managemrtified softwarublic interestrtified softwa

n with softwaware testerspromote an

Kaner, 2002 ack, 2001, Metzel, 1988, MCraig, 2002 tzel, 1988

s

enables indivong other rea

he ACM and

ers shall act tified softwarsistent with thesters shall ehighest profetesters shall

are test manment of softw

re testers sh

t are testers sh

re developer shall participethical appro

Myers, 1979Myers, 1979

viduals to leaasons to ensu

d IEEE code

consistently

re testers sha

he public inteensure that thessional stanmaintain inte

nagers and leware testing all advance

hall be fair to

rs pate in lifelonoach to the p

rn confidentiure that the i

of ethics for

with the puball act in a merest

he deliverabndards possiegrity and ind

eaders shall

the integrity

and support

ng learning rpractice of th

al and privilenformation isengineers, th

blic interest manner that is

les they provble

ze the fact th

ct and producharacteristics

(K2)

e the differenargets of test

e the purpose

e Testing (

e maintenanpect to test ty

ct characteris

s of good tes

nt levels of teting (e.g., funefects and fa

are test types(K2)

s for maintenregression te

esting: majornctional or stilures to be id

s (functional,ructural testsonal test typebased on theation testing

esting an exi

s for testing nance testingesting and im

nt models mu

e applicable t

r objectives, tructural) anddentified (K2

, non-functio

s occur at an

es based on n

e analysis of aand regress

sting systemand amount

g (modificatiompact analys

to any life cy

typical objec

d related wor2)

nal, structura

y test level (non-function

a software syion testing (K

ed to the conycle model (K

cts of testing,

rk products,

al and changK1)

al requiremeystem’s strucK2)

a new applicK2)

and retiremnance (K2)

ar-2011

utes

e

n the ntext K1)

, people

ge-ents cture

ation ent)

ng ing

el may have oject and theter componeucts (such as

nd code) proferences for glife cycle procarried out du

-incremen

developmen

m in a series oment (RAD), ced using theent, added to

e tested Reg and validatio

within a L

el, there are opment activihas test objec

d design of tetivity

be involved in cycle ombined or rample, for the

m, the purcha

elopmen

S), iterative-i

n; test activitimodels need

ial Develo

l exist, a compment levelsbus are:

more, fewer

e software prent testing, an

s business scoduced duringeneric workocesses’ (IEEuring the dev

ntal Develo

nt is the proc

of short deveRational Unese models m others devegression test

on can be ca

ife Cycle M

several chaity there is a ctives specifiests for a giv

n reviewing d

reorganized d

e integrationaser may per

nd system incenarios or u

g developme

k products inEE/IEC 1220velopment of

opment M

cess of estabelopment cycnified Processmay be testeeloped previoing is increasarried out on

Model (K2

racteristics ocorrespondi

ic to that leveven test leveldocuments a

depending o

of a Commerform integra

s (K2)

developmen

ed to softwarproaches to

odel) (K2)

f V-model us

levels of devxample, therntegration tesuse cases, reent are oftenclude Capab07) Verificat

f the software

odels (K2

blishing requicles Exampl

s (RUP) and

ed at severalously, forms asingly importeach increm

2)

of good testin

ng testing ac

el should begi

as soon as dr

n the nature ercial Off-Theation testing a

t model, vali

re developmetesting

ses four test

velopment an

re may be costing after syequirements s the basis ofbility Maturityion and valid

e work produ

)

irements, de

es are: proto agile develo test levels d

a growing patant on all itement

ng:

ctivity

in during the rafts are ava

of the projece-Shelf (COT

f testing in on

y Model Integdation (and eucts

signing, buildotyping, Rapopment modeduring each artial systemerations after

correspondiilable in the

ct or the systTS) software

ding

id els A ,

r the

ing

tem

nd other sys, and user an

Page 23 of

tems, or sysnd/or operati

78

stem deploymonal testing)

ment) and ac)

31-Ma

cceptance tes

ar-2011 sting

l defects andches and resonfiguration

ent Testin

uirements

/ migration p

es also known a

ng of, softwaone in isolati

le and the symay include thavior (e.g., g., decision component, th

t testing occnment, such ves the progrout formally mmponent testproach or teseveloping teonent tests co

K2)

ponent testingon-functionaldriven devel

ollowing can bderiving test c

d failures to bponsibilities

data shall be

ng (K2)

programs

as unit, moduare modules, ion from the ystem Stubstesting of funsearching focoverage) Te

he software curs with acce

as a unit tesrammer who managing theting is to prest-driven deveest cases, theorrecting any

g, driver, field

l requiremenopment, use

be identifiedcases (i.e., th

be found, tes

e considered

ule or prograprograms, orest of the sy

s, drivers andnctionality an

or memory leest cases aredesign or theess to the co

t frameworkwrote the coese defects

pare and autelopment Th

d simulators

nd specific noeaks) or robu

e derived fro

e data modeode being tes

or debugginode Defects

tomate test chis approach

nd integratiniterating unt

nctional requ

s testing, stu

e testing

c objectives, ts), the test obquirements a

planning,

earches for dses, etc., thanding on themay be usedon-functionalustness testin

om work prod

l

sted and with

g tool In prare typically

cases before

h is highly ite

ng small piectil they pass

40 minut

uirement,

ub, system te

the work bject (i.e., whand tool supp

h the supportactice, comp

y fixed as soo

e coding Thisrative and isces of code, a

tes

esting,

hat is port,

nd tely

on as

s is

s and

gration testintesting

on testing teoftware and m

y control onlysses implemeignificant

pe of integrat

m, which may

on strategies

al tasks, tranrder to ease

er than “big bon-functionalnctional testinegration, testeule A with mo functionalitynal and struc

d understandfore componost efficient t

g (K2)

nfiguration d

s between cystem, file syvel of integrat

ng tests the insts the interamay be done

y one side ofented as wor

tion, the mor

y lead to incr may be basnsaction procfault isolationang”

l characterist

ng

ers concentrodule B they

y of the indivictural approa

d the architenents or systetesting

Page 25 of

data omponents, ystem and hation testing anteractions bactions betwe

e after system

f the interfacrkflows may

e difficult it breased risk ased on the sycessing sequ

n and detect

tics (e.g., pe

rate solely onare interesteidual moduleches may beecture and infems are buil

78

interactions ardware, andand it may bebetween softween different

m testing In

e This mighinvolve a ser

becomes to isand additionaystem architeuences, or so

e carried out ware compo

t systems or this case, th

ht be consideries of system

solate defect

al time for troecture (such ome other as

ly, integration

may be includ

tion itself Fothe commun

s done during

gration plannmponents can

31-Ma

nt parts of a between syst

on test objeconents and isbetween

e developingered as a risk

ms Cross-pl

ts to a specifoubleshooting

as top-downspect of the s

n should nor

ded in integr

or example, ifnication betw

s done

g

k atform

fic

g

n and system rmally

ration

f they ween

t

ation

he

es, use case

ons with the

d operation mation and concerned with

ld investigateeristics Teste

m testing of f(black-box) te

be created fowhite-box) ma

al element, steam often c

nce Testin

nts ments sses ports

sses on fully maintenance

s

ata

s often the re

e involved asnce testing is

al characteriAcceptance t

K2)

ement specifi

manuals nfiguration d

h the behavio

er and/or Levnment shoul

e in order to

s based on riigh level textystem, and sy

e functional aers also needfunctional reechniques fo

r combinatio

ay then be ussuch as menucarries out sy

cation

data

or of a whole vel Test Plan

d correspondminimize the

sks and/or o

t descriptionsystem resouand non-func

d to deal withquirements s

or the aspect

ns of effectssed to asses

u structure oystem testing

ystem

of the custo

h confidence system Findassess the s

ctional requir

h incompletestarts by usin

duct The tes

t level

target or proronment-spe

rs of a system

m, parts of th

s not the madiness for de

sting scope s

oduction ecific failures

ations, busineehavior,

he system, amented appropriate

ed For examules Structu

he testing witsee Chapter

m; other

he system orain focus in eployment an

h 4)

r

nd

e product maing of the usaing of a new eptance testi

esting

fitness for u

tance) testin

he system byup/restore

ry ent sks migration task

of security v

ation accept

e testing is peoftware Accacceptance ent, legal or

field) testing

et, or COTS, arket before developing orrmed by custuse other termhat are teste

se of the sys

ng

y the system

ks ulnerabilities

tance testin

erformed agaceptance critetesting is pesafety regula

g

software oftethe softwarerganization’stomers or po

en want to g

e product is p

s site but not otential custosuch as facto

d after being

78

For exampsystem

cycle, for exawhen it is in

et feedback put up for sa

by the deveomers at theiory acceptancmoved to a

le, a large-sc

ample:

nstalled or intduring compbefore system

g:

ance criteria hen the partiulations that

from potentia

le commercialoping team

r own locatio

ce testing ancustomer’s s

31-Ma

cale system

tegrated onent testing

m testing

for producinies agree to tmust be adh

al or existingally Alpha te Beta testingons

nd site accepsite

ar-2011

g

g the hered

g esting

g, or

ptance

nal tests are

and their inte

ties can be a

or target for

d on a particperformed byquality chararchitecture i.e., confirmihanges (regrare may be dcture model),ling), and funspecification)

of Functio

system, subsequirementsThe functionsbased on funeroperability

s may be bastechniques moftware or syware (black-besting, secusuch as virus

ng, evaluates

ts or systems

of Non-fun

g includes, bing, maintainsystem works

g may be pemeasure cha

as response

as the one de

2)

e, functional nce testing, pusability test

aimed at veritesting

cular test obje

y the softwaacteristic, su

of the softwaing that deferession testindeveloped a non-functionnctional testi)

on (Functio

system or co

s specification

s are “what” tnctions and fwith specificsed on a commay be usedystem (see Cbox testing)

rity testing, inses, from ma

testing, interportability testing, white-bo

ifying the sof

ective, which

re uch as reliabiare or systemects have beeng)

nd/or used innal testing (e

ng (e.g., a p

onal Testi

omponent are

n, use casesthe system dfeatures (des

c systems, anmponent spe

to derive tesChapter 4) Fu

nvestigates talicious outsity of the soft

roperability testing, reliabili

ox testing

ftware system

h could be anility or usabil

m

en fixed (con

n structural tee.g., performarocess flow m

ing) (K2)

e to perform

s, or a functiodoes

scribed in do

nd may be pecification)

st conditionsunctional tes

the functionsiders Anothetware produc

Characteris

ormance testtesting and p

The term nand softwareesting Theseeering – Soft

esting, load tity testing, se

m (or a part o

ny of the folloity

nfirmation tes

esting (e.g., ance model,model, a stat

may be desonal specifica

ocuments or uerformed at a

s and test cassting conside

40 minut

testing, ecurity testin

of a system)

owing:

sting) and loo

a control flow usability mo

te transition

cribed in woation, or they

understood ball test levels

ses from the ers the extern

wall) relatingnctional testiwith one or

n-function

ting, stress sting It is the

al testing des quantified o

of Softwar

x) testing mayon-based te

of coverageent that a struems being cohat were miss

especially inthe code cov

d on the archproaches can

o business m

Related to

ected and fixecessfully remment activity,

s the repeate

s introduced o

e being testesoftware, or not finding deatable if the

may be perfoegression tes

a strong can

nsiders the eniques to acc

re Structu

y be performchniques, in

e of a type of ucture has beovered If covsed to increa

n componentverage of elehitecture of th

n also be apmodels or me

o Changes

ed, the softwmoved This i not a testing

ed testing of

or uncovered

d, or in anothits environmefects in soft

ey are to be u

rmed at all te

st suites are rndidate for au

Page 29 of

xternal behacomplish that

ure/Archite

med at all testorder to helpstructure

een exerciseverage is not ase coverage

t testing and ements, such

he system, splied at systeenu structure

est levels, anrun many timutomation

e Coverage

component

h as statemesuch as a cal

em, system ies)

ng and Re

be re-tested tfirmation De

ested progra

of the chang

or unrelated sged The ext

as working pfirmation test

nd includes fmes and gene

integration teents or decisilling hierarchintegration o

egression

to confirm thebugging (loc

am, after modge(s) These software comtent of regrespreviously

ting and to a

unctional, noerally evolve

31-Ma

in most case

esting) (K

iques are beness of testin

sed as a may be desigare covered

esting, tools ons Structu

e

K2)

al xing a

in advance ined releasesand is trigge

e planned en, and changepgrade of Co

ed vulnerabifor migrationronment as w

ed when data

for the retirea-retention pewhat has behat have not

he size of the

ce testing m

e existing syshow much ression test suican be difficare not availa

2002, Hetzel

04, Myers, 19Black, 2001,

SO 9126 Copeland, 20IEEE STD 82aig, 2002, He

Testing (

sting

em is often inits environm

is crucial for and hot fixered by modif

nhancement c

es of environommercial-Olities of the o

n (e.g., from well as of the

a from anoth

ement of a syeriods are reeen changed

t been chang

e existing sys

ay be done astem may beegression tesite

cult if specificable

l, 1988, IEEE

979 Copeland, 2

004, Hetzel, 29-1998 etzel, 1988, I

(K2)

n service for yment are oftensuccessful m

es Maintenanfications, mig

changes (e.gnment, such aOff-The-Shelfoperating sysone platform

e changed soher applicatio

ystem may inquired

, maintenancged The scostem and to t

at any or all t affected by sting to do T

cations are o

E 12207

2004

1988 IEEE STD 82

years or dec

n corrected, maintenancence testing isgration, or re

g., release-ba

as planned o

f software, orstem

m to another)oftware Mig

on will be mig

nclude the te

ce testing incope of maintethe size of thtest levels anchanges is cThe impact a

out of date or

29-1998

ades Duringchanged or

e testing A d

s done on antirement of th

ased), correcoperating sys

r patches to

should incluration testinggrated into th

esting of data

cludes regreenance testin

he change D

nd for any orcalled impactnalysis may

r missing, or

15 minut

g this time thextended Thistinction has

n existing

he software

ctive and stem or datacorrect newl

r all test type

e the importaare work prothe differencdefects to be2)

cess (K2)

he activities, the differencwalkthrough the factors fo

sis by Too

ypical defectsand dynamic

e, using examcal code and

ce between s

e identified, a

roles and reces between and inspecti

or successfu

ols (K2)

s and errors

c testing (K1mples, the ty design defe

sponsibilitiesdifferent type

on (K2)

l performanc

identified by)

ypical benefitects that may

formal revies: informal re

ew (K1) eview, techni

ical

o

(K1)

on without th

of testing softexecution Dts) are often

one entirely aexamine a wwed, includinions, test casnclude early ced developmfects and im

ch are unlikeysis and dynathe different

d to dynamicmselves

are easier toent defects, d

ues and

quires the exs) and autom

e execution tware work pDefects detecmuch cheap

as a manual work product

ng requiremeses, test scridefect detecment timescaproved commely to be founamic testingtechniques

c testing, stat

find in reviedesign defec

d the Tes

xecution of somated analysi

of the code

products (inccted during reper to remove

activity, but and make coents specificaipts, user guction and corales, reducedmunication R

nd in dynamihave the sacan find diffetic technique

ws than in dcts, insufficie

st Proce

oftware, stat

is (static ana

luding code)eviews early

e than those

there is alsoomments abations, desigides or web rrection, deve

d testing cosReviews can

c testing

me objectiveerent types o

es find cause

ynamic testinent maintaina

ess

ic testing tecalysis) of the

) and can be

in the life cydetected by

tool supportout it Any so

gn specificatipages

15 minut

chniques relycode or othe

performed wycle (e.g., def

y running test

t The main oftware workons, code, te

oductivity ifetime cost ons, for exam

g defects Thectively and (defects) rat

deviations frocorrect interfa

tes

y on

er

well fects

ts on

k est

mple,

hey her

om ace

il

carried out deducate test

s of a Form

ew has the fo

review criter

e personnel oles

entry and exhich parts of ntry criteria (fdocuments

he objectivesration

r the review ntial defects, aluation/recor

or logging, wcts, making reefects

evaluating anonic commun

ts found (typpdated statu

at defects haetrics

ry from informterized by teaducting the re

e developme

depends on tters and new

s, process anmeeting by rquestions anrding of resuith documenecommenda

d recording nications pically done b

s of defects ave been add(for more for

nsibilities

de the roles becution of revectives have

Page 33 of

inspection, m

mal, charact

am participateview The foent process,

nd documentreviewing the

nd commentults (review mted results oations regardissues during

by the author(in formal redressed rmal review t

(K1)

below:

views, allocabeen met

78

metric, mode

erized by notion, documeormality of a any legal or

bjectives of tbers, or discu

al review typepes)

ts to the part

e document(

ts meeting)

or minutes (foing handling

g any physic

r) views)

the review (eussion and d

es (e.g., insp

icipants s)

or more formthe defects,cal meetings

e.g., find defedecision by

he review res

r or person wviduals with a after the ne

er review Re

ew process, ader): docume

ng

products or rreviews mor

a walkthrougypes are:

ss

m of pair prodocumentedness dependinexpensive w

author

m of scenarissions -meeting preparation of awho is not thctice from quilearning, ga

efined ement particip

defect-ed as a peer ined moderaparation by rchecklists review repor

t meets its rectice from quidiscussing,

ms and chec

eads the revthe meetingween the varsts

with chief res

a specific teccessary prepeviewers shoand should taents all the is

related work

re effective atainer, testerreviously und

(K2)

ted work proused, the ordview, or an in

gh with custo

ogramming oing on the reway to get so

os, dry runs,eparation of r

a review repo

he author) ite informal tining unders

-detection prpation review withoator (not the areviewers

rt which incluequirements ite informal tmaking deciscking conform

iew of the do, and followinious points osponsibility fohnical or busparation, idenould be choseake part in assues, proble

products froand efficient

r or operationdetected issu

oduct may beder may varynspection mamers The m

or a technicaleviewers ome benefit

, peer groupreviewers ort including

o very formastanding, find

rocess that inout managemauthor)

udes the list and, where a

o very formasions, evaluamance to spe

ocument or sng-up after th

of view and is

or the documsiness backgntify and des

en to represe

ny review meems and ope

om different pFor example

ns, or a checues

e the subject

y For examp

ay be carriedmain characte

lead review

participation

list of finding

al ding defects

ncludes peerment particip

of findings, tappropriate,

al ating alternatecifications, p

set of docume

he meeting

s often the pement(s) to be ground (also scribe findingent different eetings

n points that

perspectives

e, a checklistcklist of typica

of more than

le, an inform out on a reqeristics, optio

wing designs

n

gs

rs and techniation

the verdict wrecommend

tives, findingplans, regula

ents, includin

If necessaryerson upon wreviewed

called check

gs (e.g., defeperspectives

and code

ical experts w

hether the ations relate

g defects, solations, and

ng

y, the whom

kers or ects) in

s and fied

various nts

w If

ay be poses

with

ed to

lving

t including lis

p process (winding defectsical reviews

e same orga

s Factors f

reviews inclu

s clear predeffor the revie

ed reviewershem to prepa

re welcomed

nd psycholognducted in a

e participantsues are appliework produc

es are used

in review tepports a gooect scheduleshasis on lear

ot the authorexamination

es and checria for accep

st of findingsith optional p

s and inspectinizational lev

n atmospher

s

ed that are scts and revie

if appropriatechniques, es

od review pros)

rning and pro

Page 35 of

)

n

cklists ptance of the

process impro

ions can be pvel This type

ws (K2)

ves

s are involvedbute to the reier

sed objective

s are dealt w

re of trust; thsuitable to acewers

e to increasespecially the ocess (e.g., bocess improv

ith (e.g., mak

he outcome wchieve the ob

e effectivenesmore formal

by incorporatvement

ss of defect

l techniques ting adequate

31-Ma

group, eer review”

ut the produc

tive experiensed for the

to the type aidentificationsuch as

e time for rev

s execute the

ng As with re

ze program cXML

nalysis is:

of defects pribout suspicioexity measurdefects not edencies andainability of cfects, if lessoovered by staariable with arfaces betwe

re not used oead) code oneous logic ted constructandards violabilities

s of code andare typically ards) before a

n managemeroduce a largective use ofsome suppo

e software coeviews, staticcode (e.g., co

or to test exeous aspects o

re easily found b inconsistenccode and desons are learnatic analysis

an undefinedeen modules

or are improp(potentially i

ts ations

d software mused by devand during cent tools, and

c analysis finontrol flow an

ecution

of the code o

by dynamic tcies in softwsign

ned in develotools include

d value

s and componperly declarednfinite loops

models velopers (cheomponent an

nd data flow)

or design by ttesting ware models sopment e:

nents

d )

ecking again

nd integratio

rs during sofessages, wh

luding the ca

ode and softweing examinelocate defectrather than fa), as well as g

the calculatio

such as links

st predefined

n testing or wftware modelich need to b

on of metrics

s

d rules or when checkiling Static

be well-mana

metrics

tes

s ol; ard to

c utput

s, such

ng-in aged

of Test Des

easons that b

t design techthe charactestructure-bas

n-based o

st cases fromnalysis, decisthe main purcould use thethe concept

ased or Wh

e the concepthe concepts

s can also be

s procedures

st cases fromues (K3) statement an(K4)

based Tec

easons for wommon defec

e experience

est Techni

test design tespective mo

of test cases2)

into a well-sknowledge o

sign Tech

both specifichniques are uristics, commsed testing a

r Black-bo

m given softwsion tables anrpose of each

iques (K2)

techniques aodels and sof

of the testers

hniques (K

ation-based useful and lismonalities, anand experienc

ox Techni

ware models

nd state tran

h of the four and how covtesting and i

Technique

of code cove

nt and decisi

st levels otheevel) (K2) rol flows usincoverage for

(K2)

ases based ohniques with

)

according to tftware charac

ques (K3)

using equivasition diagratesting technverage may b

on intuition, especification

their fitness tcteristics (K2

28

letion of each

e specificatiocedure (K2) bility to the respecification

and structure

on technique

es between ssting (K2)

alence partitiams/tables (Kniques, what

be measuredK2)

e, and give reonent testing

t and decisio

ss with respe

experience ann-based testin

to a given co2)

ioning, boundK3)

ite-dary ype of

st conditionsore test case

ility from test

t analysis whring test ana

o use based oysis)

he test casesexecution pre

st objective(s

EE STD ditions) and tould be produ states, and

829-a pl829-ausible, bould ideally bntation the tepecification (ecution of a t

n a test scripcedures and that defines t

t of the testinety or regulat

is document

s A test cond

es (e.g., a fun

t conditions bhen requiremlysis the deta

on, among o

s and test dateconditions, es) or test con1998) descriest case speuced as part any other co

ut erroneous

be defined prest cases areIEEE STD 8test If tests a

pt (which is aautomated tthe order in wuted The tetization, and

back to the sments changeailed test apother conside

ta are createexpected resndition(s) Thibes the contecifications

of the specionsequences

s, result mayrior to test ex

e developed,29-1998) Thare run using

n automatedtest scripts awhich the va

st execution technical an

ss (K3)

ule, test proc

an be done i

s it is describthe maturityments, and thyzed in ordened as an iteaction, qualit

specifications

e, and determproach is imerations, the

ed and specifsults and exe

e ‘Standard tent of test d

fication of a

s of the test

y be interpretxecution

nd logical de

cedure speci

n different wbed below) T

fied A test cecution postcfor Softwareesign specifi

test case an

If expected rted as the co

ed, prioritizededure specifiution tool, thure)

ently formed ocedures, an

ll take into apendencies

15 minut

ification, test

ways, from veThe level of

nd developmvolved

ne what to tehat could be stic or structu

ements enabrements cove

o select the t

ks (see Cha

case consistsconditions, de Test

ications

d include ouresults have orrect one

tes

t

ery ent

est, ural

bles erage test pter 5

s of a efined

tputs, not

zed in ence

of

ed specificat

s, or test datonal and non-arding the inte

es (also calleture of the corience-basedwhat should b

l clearly into

to specificatiodesign techn

re covered

stics of speciormal or inforomponents

be derived systics of struct

ut how the sosign informativerage of therived systemstics of experand experien

of testers, denvironment is

ta based on -functional teernal structu

ed structural omponent or

d techniques

be tested

a single cate

on-based tesniques as wh

fication-basermal, are useystematicallyture-based teoftware is coion)

e software camatically to inrience-basednce of peopleevelopers, us

s one source cts and their

Page 39 of

sign Tec

-based test d

identify test cques as blacechniques) a

an analysis oesting Black

re of the com

or system Bla

structure-to leverage

egory; others

st design techite-box tech

ed test desig

ed for the spe

y from these est design tenstructed is

an be measuncrease cove

d test design

e are used tosers and othe

of informatiodistribution i

78

chnique

design techni

conditions, teck-box or whiare a way to d

of the test bak-box testingmponent or s-based technck-box and wthe experien

s have eleme

chniques as bniques In ad

n techniquesecification ofmodels echniques incused to derivured for existerage techniques

ents of more

black-box tecddition exper

s include:

f the problem

clude:

ve the test cating test case

include:

test cases ers about theource of infor

31-Ma

15 minut

sign techniqu

nd test data ck-box test deelect test ntation This

n, does not utested Whitbased on an sting may alsopers, testers

than one

chniques andrience-based

m to be solved

ases (e.g., c

es, and furthe

e software, itrmation