ISTQB CTFL4 Practice Test - Questions Answers, Page 18

The correct outcome of a two-value boundary value analysis applied to the password length is the set of test cases represented by option D. Boundary value analysis is a test design technique that focuses on the values at the boundaries of an equivalence partition, such as the minimum and maximum values, or the values just above and below the boundaries. A two-value boundary value analysis uses two values for each boundary, one representing the valid value and one representing the invalid value. For example, if the valid range of values is from 4 to 7, then the two values for the lower boundary are 3 and 4, and the two values for the upper boundary are 7 and 8. The test cases in option D use these values for the password length, while also satisfying the other requirements of the password, such as containing at least one numeric character, one capital letter, and one lowercase letter. The test cases in option D are:

1RhT: a 4-character password that is valid

rSp53: a 5-character password that is valid

3N3e10: a 6-character password that is valid

8sBdby: an 8-character password that is invalid The test cases in the other options are incorrect, because they either use values that are not at the boundaries of the password length, or they do not meet the other requirements of the password. For example, the test cases in option A are:

1xA: a 3-character password that is invalid, but it does not contain a capital letter

aB11: a 4-character password that is valid

Pq1ZZab: a 7-character password that is valid

7iDD0a1x: an 8-character password that is invalidReference: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.1, Black-box Test Design Techniques1

ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Boundary Value Analysis, Equivalence Partition2

The minimum number of test cases needed to cover the full decision table associated with this scenario is 6. This is because the decision table has 4 conditions (type of customer and amount of sale) and 4 actions (bonus percentage). The conditions have 2 possible values each (Basic or Premium, and G1, G2 or G3), so the total number of combinations is 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 16. However, not all combinations are valid, as some of them are contradictory or impossible. For example, a sale cannot be both less than 300 euros and greater than 2000 euros at the same time. Therefore, we need to eliminate the invalid combinations and keep only the valid ones. The valid combinations are:

Type of customer

Amount of sale

Bonus percentage

Basic

G1

3%

Basic

G2

5%

Basic

G3

7%

Premium

G1

5%

Premium

G2

7%

Premium

G3

10%

These 6 combinations cover all the possible values of the conditions and actions, and they are the minimum number of test cases needed to cover the full decision table.

Experience-based test techniques are test design techniques that rely on the experience, knowledge, intuition, and creativity of the testers to identify and execute test cases that are likely to find defects in the software system. Experience-based test techniques are often useful to detect hidden defects that have not been targeted by black-box test techniques, which are test design techniques that use the external behavior and specifications of the software system as the test basis, without considering its internal structure or implementation. Experience-based test techniques can complement black-box test techniques by covering aspects that are not explicitly specified, such as usability, security, reliability, performance, etc. The other statements are false, because:

Experience-based test techniques do not rely on the experience of testers to identify the root causes of defects found by black-box test techniques, but rather to identify the potential sources of defects based on their own insights, heuristics, or exploratory testing. The root causes of defects are usually identified by debugging or root cause analysis, which are activities that involve examining the code or the development process to find and fix the errors that led to the defects.

Some of the most common test basis used by white-box test techniques include the source code, the design documents, the architecture diagrams, and the control flow graphs of the software system. White-box test techniques are test design techniques that use the internal structure and implementation of the software system as the test basis, and aim to achieve a certain level of test coverage based on the code elements, such as statements, branches, paths, etc. User stories, use cases, and business processes are examples of test basis used by black-box test techniques, as they describe the functional and non-functional requirements of the software system from the perspective of the users or the stakeholders.

The primary goal of experience-based test techniques is not to design test cases that can be easily automated using a GUI-based test automation tool, but rather to design test cases that can reveal defects that are not easily detected by other test techniques, such as boundary value analysis, equivalence partitioning, state transition testing, etc. Test automation is the use of software tools to execute test cases and compare actual results with expected results, without human intervention. Test automation can be applied to different types of test techniques, depending on the test objectives, the test levels, the test tools, and the test resources. However, test automation is not always feasible or beneficial, especially for test cases that require human judgment, creativity, or exploration, such as those designed by experience-based test techniques.Reference: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.1, Black-box Test Design Techniques

ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.2, White-box Test Design Techniques

ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.3, Experience-based Test Design Techniques

ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Experience-based Test Technique, Black-box Test Technique, White-box Test Technique, Test Basis, Test Coverage, Test Automation

As a functional tester, you should open a defect report providing detailed information on which devices and by running which tests you observed the issue. A defect report is a document that records the occurrence, nature, and status of a defect detected during testing, and provides information for further investigation and resolution. A defect report should include relevant information such as the defect summary, the defect description, the defect severity, the defect priority, the defect status, the defect origin, the defect category, the defect reproduction steps, the defect screenshots, the defect attachments, etc. Opening a defect report is a good practice for any tester who finds a defect in the software system, regardless of the type or level of testing performed. The other options are not recommended, because:

The issue is related to performance efficiency, not functionality, but that does not mean that as a functional tester, you should not open any defect report as all the functional tests passed. Performance efficiency is a quality characteristic that measures how well the software system performs its functions under stated conditions, such as the response time, the resource utilization, the throughput, etc. Performance efficiency is an important aspect of the user experience, especially for web applications that run on different devices and networks. Even if the functional tests passed, meaning that the software system met the functional requirements, the performance issue observed on some devices could still affect the user satisfaction, the usability, the reliability, and the security of the software system. Therefore, as a functional tester, you have the responsibility to report the performance issue as a defect, and provide as much information as possible to help the developers or the performance testers to investigate and resolve it.

This answer is correct because it follows the logical dependencies and allows executing the test cases in priority order. TC4, TC3, and TC2 are executed first because they have the highest priority. TC6 is executed next because it has a logical dependency on TC2. TC1 is executed next because it has a logical dependency on TC5. Finally, TC5 is executed last because it has the lowest priority.Reference: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 documents

This answer is correct because configuration management is a process of establishing and maintaining consistency of a product's performance, functional, and physical attributes with its requirements, design, and operational information throughout its life. Configuration management helps ensure that all relevant project documentation and software items are uniquely identified in all their versions and therefore can be unambiguously referenced in test documentation. This supports testing by providing traceability, consistency, and control over the test artifacts and the software under test.Reference: : ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, : ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.2.2.2

Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique in which testers dynamically design and execute tests based on their knowledge, intuition, and learning of the software system, without following predefined test scripts or test cases. Exploratory testing can be conducted following a session-based approach, which is a structured way of managing and measuring exploratory testing. In a session-based approach, the testers perform uninterrupted test sessions, usually lasting between 60 and 120 minutes, with a specific charter or goal, and document the issues detected, the test coverage achieved, and the time spent in session sheets. Session sheets are records of the test activities, results, and observations during a test session, which can be used for reporting, debriefing, and learning purposes. The other statements are false, because:

Exploratory testing is not a test technique in which testers explore the requirements specification to detect non testable requirements, but rather a test technique in which testers explore the software system to detect functional and non-functional defects, as well as to learn new information, risks, or opportunities. Non testable requirements are requirements that are ambiguous, incomplete, inconsistent, or not verifiable, which can affect the quality and effectiveness of the testing process. Non testable requirements can be detected by applying static testing techniques, such as reviews or inspections, to the requirements specification, before the software system is developed or tested.

Exploratory testing is not a test technique used by testers during informal code reviews to find defects by exploring the source code, but rather a test technique used by testers during dynamic testing to find defects by exploring the behavior and performance of the software system, without examining the source code. Informal code reviews are static testing techniques, in which the source code is analyzed by one or more reviewers, without following a formal process or using a checklist, to identify defects, violations, or improvements. Informal code reviews are usually performed by developers or peers, not by testers.

In exploratory testing, testers usually do not produce scripted tests and establish bidirectional traceability between these tests and the items of the test basis, but rather produce unscripted tests and adapt them based on the feedback and the findings of the testing process. Scripted tests are tests that are designed and documented in advance, with predefined inputs, outputs, and expected results, and are executed according to a test plan or a test procedure. Bidirectional traceability is the ability to trace both forward and backward the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, the risks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc. Scripted tests and bidirectional traceability are usually associated with more formal and structured testing approaches, such as specification-based or structure-based test techniques, not with exploratory testing.Reference: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.3, Experience-based Test Design Techniques1

ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Exploratory Testing, Session-based Testing, Session Sheet, Non Testable Requirement, Static Testing, Informal Review, Dynamic Testing, Scripted Testing, Bidirectional Traceability2

This answer is correct because the test procedures of all test cases that have been executed are not a typical content of a test completion report for a test project. A test completion report is a document that summarizes the test activities and results at the end of a test project. It usually includes information such as the test objectives, scope, approach, resources, schedule, results, deviations, issues, risks, lessons learned, and recommendations for improvement. The test procedures of all test cases that have been executed are part of the test documentation, but they are not relevant for the test completion report, as they do not provide a high-level overview of the test project outcomes and performance.Reference: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.5.3.2

This answer is correct because error guessing is a test design technique where the experience and intuition of the tester are used to anticipate where errors, defects and failures have occurred or are likely to occur, and to design test cases to expose them. Error guessing can be based on factors such as the complexity of the system or component, the known or suspected weaknesses of the system or component, the previous history of defects, or the common types of errors in the domain or technology. Error guessing can be used as a complementary technique to other more systematic or formal techniques, or when there is insufficient information or time to apply them.Reference: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.2.5