ISTQB ISTQB-CTFL - ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL v4.0)

This question relates to identifying product risks, which are potential problems associated with the product itself, such as software functionality, reliability, usability, and performance. Option A describes a scenario where the application might not meet performance requirements under specific conditions (up to 300 concurrent users), which directly impacts the product's ability to perform its intended function. This is a classic example of a product risk, as it concerns the product's quality and its ability to meet user needs. Options B, C, and D, on the other hand, relate to project risks, which are concerns related to the management and execution of the project, such as tool acquisition, environment configuration, and team expertise, rather than the quality of the product itself.

 If a program got 100% decision coverage in a test, then it is guaranteed that every executable statement is covered. Decision coverage (also known as branch coverage) is a type of structural coverage (also known as white-box coverage) that measures how many decision outcomes have been exercised by a test suite. A decision outcome is a possible result of a decision point (such as an if-then-else statement) in a program’s code. Decision coverage requires that each decision point has both true and false outcomes executed at least once by a test suite. Decision coverage implies statement coverage, which is another type of structural coverage that measures how many executable statements have been executed by a test suite. Statement coverage requires that each executable statement is executed at least once by a test suite. Therefore, if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test, then it also got 100% statement coverage in a test, which means that every executable statement is covered. The other options are not guaranteed to be true if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test. Every output equivalence class has been tested and every input equivalence class has been tested are not guaranteed to be true if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test, because equivalence classes are based on functional requirements or specifications, not on code structure or logic. Equivalence classes are used in specification-based testing (also known as black-box testing), which is a type of testing that does not consider the internal structure or implementation of the system under test. Decision coverage is used in structure-based testing (also known as white-box testing), which is a type of testing that considers the internal structure or implementation of the system under test. Therefore, achieving 100% decision coverage does not imply achieving 100% equivalence class coverage. The “dead” code has not been covered is not guaranteed to be true if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test, because dead code (also known as unreachable code) is code that can never be executed due to logical errors or design flaws. Dead code can reduce readability and maintainability of the code, as well as increase complexity and size. Decision coverage does not account for dead code, as it only considers the decision outcomes that are possible to execute. Therefore, achieving 100% decision coverage does not imply that the dead code has not been covered. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 36.

The correct matching of the topics with their descriptions is as follows:

Functional behaviour: The externally observable behaviour with user actions as input operating under certain configurations (A to C).

Quality characteristics: How the system performs the specific behaviour (B to A).

Scenarios: A sequence of actions between an external actor and the system, to accomplish a specific goal or business task (C to B).

Business rules: Activities that can only be performed in the system under certain conditions defined by outside procedures and constraints (D to E).

External interfaces: Description of the connections between the system to be developed and the outside world (E to D)​​.

A product risk is a risk that affects the quality or timeliness of the software product being developed or tested1. Product risks are related to the requirements, design, implementation, verification, and maintenance of the software product2.

The risk of the sub-contractor failing to meet his commitment is a product risk, as it could cause a delay in the completion of the testing required for the current cycle, which in turn could affect the release date of the product. The release date is an important aspect of the product quality, as it reflects the customer satisfaction and the market competitiveness of the product3.

The other options are not correct because:

A. It is not true that any risk associated with development timeline is a product risk. Some risks could be project risks, which are risks that affect the management or control of the software project, such as budget, resources, schedule, or communication1. For example, a risk of losing a key project stakeholder is a project risk, not a product risk.

B. It is not true that the risk is no longer a risk for the Test Manager since an independent party is managing it. The Test Manager is still responsible for ensuring that the testing activities are completed according to the test plan and the quality objectives4. The Test Manager should monitor and control the sub-contractor’s performance and communicate with him regularly to identify and mitigate any potential issues or deviations5.

C. It is not clear what is meant by “object” in this option, but it could be interpreted as the software system under test or the test object6. In any case, the risk is not an object risk, as it does not affect the successful completion of the object, but rather the successful completion of the testing of the object. An object risk could be a risk that affects the functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, or portability of the software system under test2. For example, a risk of the software system having a high complexity or a low testability is an object risk, not a product risk.

References =

1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 97

2 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 98

3 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 99

4 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 100

5 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 101

6 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 102

In the given code snippet, the premium is increased by 1500 if the age is less than 30. Therefore, at the boundary value of age 29, the premium should be 2500 + 1500 = 4000, and at age 30, the premium should remain at its initial value of 2500, as the condition is no longer met. Option B correctly reflects this with 29, 4000 and 30, 2500 as the boundary value and the expected results, respectively.

The key principles of software testing include: i. Testing shows the presence of defects, not their absence. iv. Defects cluster together. v. Testing is context dependent. vi. Beware of the pesticide paradox. vii. Absence of errors is a fallacy. These principles highlight the importance of recognizing the limitations and context of testing, as well as the potential for repeated tests to become less effective​​.

Equivalence partitioning is a black-box test design technique where inputs to the software or system are divided into groups that are expected to exhibit similar behavior. For an integer field that should accept values from 1 to 15, the valid equivalence class is 1 through 15. The invalid equivalence classes are numbers less than 1 and numbers more than 15. Therefore, option D, "Less than 1, 1 through 15, more than 15," correctly identifies the valid equivalence class along with the two invalid classes, covering all possible input scenarios for the field. Options A, B, and C either do not accurately capture the valid range or incorrectly specify the range boundaries.