This document summarizes an empirical study comparing manual testing to model-based testing (MBT) conducted on a web-based commercial system used by FDA customers. MBT found more issues overall, especially business logic and corner case issues, but required more initial effort to set up models and test infrastructure. Manual testing was better at finding some types of issues like field discrepancies and detected usability issues, and required less initial effort than MBT. Both approaches have benefits and drawbacks, and combining them may be most effective for testing complex systems.
This document discusses model-based testing approaches used at NASA. It summarizes that (1) test cases are often developed manually for NASA projects, which can miss errors, and testing consumes significant resources; (2) the presented approach uses modeling to generate automated test cases from models of NASA systems, which has found bugs in several projects; and (3) the approach has been applied to frameworks for ground and flight systems as well as GUIs, finding specification errors and bugs that were then fixed by project teams.
Model-based Testing of a Software Bus - Applied on Core Flight ExecutiveDharmalingam Ganesan
This document discusses model-based testing of a software bus applied to the Core Flight Executive system. It describes traditional automated testing methods and their limitations. Model-based testing uses a model of the system under test to automatically generate test cases. The authors developed a model of the Core Flight Executive software bus in Spec Explorer to generate test cases covering behaviors like message creation, subscription, and sending. This allowed rigorous testing of the multi-tasking architecture.
This document discusses interface-implementation contract checking of NASA's OSAL software. It presents static equivalence analysis and static contract checking techniques to find inconsistencies between different OSAL implementations and between code and documentation. Static equivalence analysis identified differences in return codes and other behaviors between POSIX, RTEMS and vxWorks implementations. Static contract checking without formal contracts extracted return codes from code and comments to find mismatches, identifying issues now addressed. The techniques provided lightweight but effective methods to detect errors and inconsistencies in the critical NASA OSAL software.
Model-based Testing using Microsoft’s Spec Explorer Tool: A Case StudyDharmalingam Ganesan
Spec Explorer is a model-based testing tool that generates test cases from models of the system under test (SUT). The document describes a case study using Spec Explorer to test NASA's GMSEC API, which provides a message bus for component communication. Key aspects of the case study include developing models of the API in Spec Explorer's modeling language, slicing models to focus testing, generating state machines and test cases from the models, and executing the tests on implementations of the API in different programming languages. The automated and parameterized testing identified specification issues and corner cases in the SUT.
A practical approach for end-to-end test automation is discussed. The approach is based on model-based testing. The presentation discusses several industrial case studies of applying model-based testing to automatically generate innumerable number of ready-to-run, executable test cases.
This document summarizes a presentation given by Mikael Lindvall and Dharma Ganesan of the Fraunhofer Center for Experimental Software Engineering Maryland on software architecture, reverse engineering, and analyzing legacy systems. The Fraunhofer Center develops techniques for analyzing the structure and behavior of legacy software using methods and tools. They have analyzed several large legacy systems, including NASA's Space Network and Core Flight Software. The presentation describes their model of software architecture and reverse engineering, which involves creating views of the runtime and development architecture from source code. It also gives an example of how they analyzed the Common Ground System, a ground system for NASA missions, by visualizing its actual architecture based on source code.
1) The document describes an approach for automated testing of large multi-language software systems using cloud computing.
2) Key aspects of the approach include generating test cases from models of software APIs and interfaces and executing them using tools like JUnit and Selenium.
3) The approach was applied to test portions of NASA software like GMSEC and CFS, and was able to find bugs not discovered with manual testing.
This document summarizes an approach to automated testing of large, multi-language software systems using cloud computing. It discusses applying a lightweight, model-based test generation and execution approach to several NASA projects, including GMSEC, Core Flight Software, Space Network, and Mars Science Laboratory. Models of system APIs and interfaces are developed and used to automatically generate test cases, finding bugs. The approach has been successfully transferred to other teams and is being applied to additional complex NASA systems.
This document discusses model-based testing approaches used at NASA. It summarizes that (1) test cases are often developed manually for NASA projects, which can miss errors, and testing consumes significant resources; (2) the presented approach uses modeling to generate automated test cases from models of NASA systems, which has found bugs in several projects; and (3) the approach has been applied to frameworks for ground and flight systems as well as GUIs, finding specification errors and bugs that were then fixed by project teams.
Model-based Testing of a Software Bus - Applied on Core Flight ExecutiveDharmalingam Ganesan
This document discusses model-based testing of a software bus applied to the Core Flight Executive system. It describes traditional automated testing methods and their limitations. Model-based testing uses a model of the system under test to automatically generate test cases. The authors developed a model of the Core Flight Executive software bus in Spec Explorer to generate test cases covering behaviors like message creation, subscription, and sending. This allowed rigorous testing of the multi-tasking architecture.
This document discusses interface-implementation contract checking of NASA's OSAL software. It presents static equivalence analysis and static contract checking techniques to find inconsistencies between different OSAL implementations and between code and documentation. Static equivalence analysis identified differences in return codes and other behaviors between POSIX, RTEMS and vxWorks implementations. Static contract checking without formal contracts extracted return codes from code and comments to find mismatches, identifying issues now addressed. The techniques provided lightweight but effective methods to detect errors and inconsistencies in the critical NASA OSAL software.
Model-based Testing using Microsoft’s Spec Explorer Tool: A Case StudyDharmalingam Ganesan
Spec Explorer is a model-based testing tool that generates test cases from models of the system under test (SUT). The document describes a case study using Spec Explorer to test NASA's GMSEC API, which provides a message bus for component communication. Key aspects of the case study include developing models of the API in Spec Explorer's modeling language, slicing models to focus testing, generating state machines and test cases from the models, and executing the tests on implementations of the API in different programming languages. The automated and parameterized testing identified specification issues and corner cases in the SUT.
A practical approach for end-to-end test automation is discussed. The approach is based on model-based testing. The presentation discusses several industrial case studies of applying model-based testing to automatically generate innumerable number of ready-to-run, executable test cases.
This document summarizes a presentation given by Mikael Lindvall and Dharma Ganesan of the Fraunhofer Center for Experimental Software Engineering Maryland on software architecture, reverse engineering, and analyzing legacy systems. The Fraunhofer Center develops techniques for analyzing the structure and behavior of legacy software using methods and tools. They have analyzed several large legacy systems, including NASA's Space Network and Core Flight Software. The presentation describes their model of software architecture and reverse engineering, which involves creating views of the runtime and development architecture from source code. It also gives an example of how they analyzed the Common Ground System, a ground system for NASA missions, by visualizing its actual architecture based on source code.
1) The document describes an approach for automated testing of large multi-language software systems using cloud computing.
2) Key aspects of the approach include generating test cases from models of software APIs and interfaces and executing them using tools like JUnit and Selenium.
3) The approach was applied to test portions of NASA software like GMSEC and CFS, and was able to find bugs not discovered with manual testing.
This document summarizes an approach to automated testing of large, multi-language software systems using cloud computing. It discusses applying a lightweight, model-based test generation and execution approach to several NASA projects, including GMSEC, Core Flight Software, Space Network, and Mars Science Laboratory. Models of system APIs and interfaces are developed and used to automatically generate test cases, finding bugs. The approach has been successfully transferred to other teams and is being applied to additional complex NASA systems.
Secure application programming in the presence of side channel attacksDharmalingam Ganesan
This document discusses secure programming patterns to harden code against side channel attacks. It describes several patterns such as using random offsets when accessing arrays instead of sequential access, verifying full data before authentication instead of early failure, using non-trivial constants, verifying loop and data integrity with checksums, and choosing constants with maximum hamming distance for fault resistance. Implementing these patterns makes reverse engineering and attacks like fault injection more difficult.
This document discusses research into automatic test case generation for train control systems. It describes a tool called CompleteTest that uses model checking to generate test cases from function block diagram programs that satisfy various logic coverage criteria. The tool was evaluated in a case study with Bombardier Transportation where it generated tests for some programs, but failed to terminate within 10 minutes for larger programs. Ongoing work involves addressing state space explosions, complementing model checking with other techniques, and measuring test effectiveness at finding faults.
Software testing tools (free and open source)Wael Mansour
This document discusses various tools used for test automation including Cobertura, Selenium, JMeter, Bugzilla, and Testia Tarantula. Cobertura is a code coverage tool that calculates test coverage percentages. Selenium is described as a tool for automating web application testing across browsers. JMeter is introduced as a load testing tool focused on analyzing performance of web applications. Bugzilla and Tarantula are mentioned as tools for bug tracking and project/test management respectively in agile software development. The document also discusses integrating these various tools together for a complete test automation framework.
Manual testing involves a human tester performing actions and verifying results, while automated testing uses a tool to playback and replay tests. The document discusses various software testing tools, including WinRunner for functional testing of Windows apps, SilkTest for web apps, and LoadRunner for performance and load testing. It provides overviews and demonstrations of the tools' functionality, such as recording and playing back tests, verifying results, and generating load to assess performance.
This document contains an agenda for a presentation on verification topics including basics, challenges, technologies, strategies, methodologies, and skills needed for corporate jobs. It also includes details about the presenter such as their name, role at Mentor Graphics, contact information, and background. The document dives into various aspects of verification like simulation, testbenches, formal verification, and limitations of simulation.
The document describes a SystemVerilog verification methodology that includes assertion-based verification, coverage-driven verification, constrained random verification, and use of scoreboards and checkers. It outlines the verification flow from design specifications through testbench development, integration and simulation, and discusses techniques like self-checking test cases, top-level and block-level environments, and maintaining bug reports.
The document discusses various types of test tools used at different stages of testing. It describes tools for test management, requirements management, incident management, configuration management, static testing, static analysis, modeling, test design, test data preparation, test execution, test harness, test comparators, coverage measurement, security testing, dynamic analysis, performance testing, load testing, stress testing, monitoring and thanks the reader. The tools support activities like scheduling tests, tracking bugs, reviewing code, generating test data, automating test execution, measuring code coverage and monitoring system performance.
This document discusses unit testing of the Core Flight Software (CFS) product line developed by NASA. It examines how the CFS architecture facilitates or impedes unit testing and how the architecture of test code can be defined based on the system architecture. The CFS uses a unit test architecture with mocks/stubs of dependent modules to enable isolated testing. It finds that defining abstract interfaces and exposing internal details controlled via architectural rules improves testability, and that complete dependency graphs do not inherently imply poor testability.
Formal verification involves proving the correctness of algorithms or systems with respect to a formal specification using mathematical techniques. It can be done by formally modeling a system and using theorem proving or model checking to verify that the model satisfies given properties. Theorem proving uses logical deduction to prove properties, while model checking automatically checks all possible states of a finite model against temporal logic properties. Both approaches have advantages and limitations, but formal verification can help find bugs and prove correctness of systems.
SE2018_Lec 20_ Test-Driven Development (TDD)Amr E. Mohamed
The document discusses test-driven development (TDD) and unit testing. It explains that TDD follows a cycle of writing an initial failing test case, producing just enough code to pass that test, and refactoring the code. Unit testing involves writing test cases for individual classes or functions, using assertions to validate expected outcomes. The JUnit framework is introduced for writing and running unit tests in Java.
Planning & building scalable test infrastructureVijayan Reddy
Vijayan Reddy discusses building a scalable test infrastructure by integrating various testing tools and tasks. He recommends taking a blue-print approach and using available commercial and open source tools. A meta controller can help orchestrate test execution across platforms and provide metrics collection, defect analysis tracing, and intelligent reporting. Building interfaces between source control, test case management, bug tracking, and test results can help scale the infrastructure. Automating tasks like builds, BVT, and reporting can improve efficiency.
IRSim implements an approach to establish traceability links among artifacts such as requirements, source code, and test cases. This presentation shows how we used IRSim on NASA software to establish traceability links for sofware analysis, program understanding, and quality improvement, etc.
This is the most important topic of OOAD named as Object Oriented Testing. It is used to prepare a good software which has no bug in it and it performs very fast. <a href="https://harisjamil.pro">Haris Jamil</a>
This document provides evaluation criteria for selecting automated test tools. It recommends evaluating criteria like object recognition abilities, platform support, recording and playback of browser and Java objects, scripting languages, debugging support, and more. The goals are to reduce the effort of evaluating tools and ensure they meet an organization's specific testing needs, environments, and skill levels. Over 80 hours may be needed to fully evaluate each tool against the outlined criteria.
This document discusses software testing tools and proposes a taxonomy for classifying them. It begins by addressing common myths and facts about software testing and developers. It then provides definitions of software testing and examples of over 20 specific software testing tools. The document proposes that a taxonomy is needed to classify tools to help testers choose the right ones. It reviews existing tool taxonomies and their shortcomings before concluding and thanking the reader.
The document discusses various techniques for testing commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components. It describes methods like the Analytic Hierarchy Process for COTS evaluation and selection. It also covers different approaches to provide testing information for COTS like the component metadata approach. The document discusses levels of testing like unit and integration testing as well as types of testing such as functionality, reliability and security testing.
The Impact of Test Ownership and Team Structure on the Reliability and Effect...Kim Herzig
The document discusses how test ownership and team structure can impact test reliability and effectiveness. It analyzes metrics related to test ownership, such as the number of test owners, owners who have left the company, and organizational structure of owners. The analysis found that tests with more concentrated ownership among fewer groups tended to be more effective, while distributed or scattered ownership across multiple groups made tests less effective. Tests were also less effective if owners who had left the company contributed to them. The organizational structure metrics proved to be good predictors of test effectiveness and excellent predictors of test reliability.
Formal verification is the process of proving or disproving properties of a system using precise mathematical methods. It provides guarantees that no simulations will violate specified properties. Formal verification can be applied at the block and system-on-chip levels to eliminate bugs early. However, current formal verification tools have limitations including capacity issues, generating coverage metrics from assertions, and handling large designs and multiple modes of operation. Improving formal verification requires efficient strategies and advancing tool capabilities.
Unit testing involves individually testing small units or modules of code, such as functions, classes, or programs, to determine if they are fit for use. The goal is to isolate each part of a program and verify that it works as intended, helps reduce defects early in the development process, and improves code design. Unit testing is typically done by developers to test their code meets its design before integration testing.
This document describes a method developed by Fraunhofer to reconstruct the as-built architecture of medical device software. The method discovers both static and runtime architectural structures from source code to help the FDA analyze software for safety issues during regulatory reviews when only documents and test results are submitted, not source code. It addresses FDA needs like identifying unsafe code constructs and assessing testability and safety. Sample outputs show tasks, communication, and module dependencies. The method formalizes the reconstruction using graph relations to aid static analysis tool usage and safety assurance cases.
Verifying Architectural Design Rules of a Flight Software Product LineDharmalingam Ganesan
This document discusses verifying architectural design rules of the Core Flight Software (CFS) product line. [1] It provides background on the CFS, which is a reusable flight software environment developed by NASA. [2] The analysis used tools to check that the CFS implementation follows documented rules regarding dependencies, decomposition, redundancy, and preprocessor usage. [3] It found some minor violations but concluded the CFS team performs rigorous design and code reviews.
Secure application programming in the presence of side channel attacksDharmalingam Ganesan
This document discusses secure programming patterns to harden code against side channel attacks. It describes several patterns such as using random offsets when accessing arrays instead of sequential access, verifying full data before authentication instead of early failure, using non-trivial constants, verifying loop and data integrity with checksums, and choosing constants with maximum hamming distance for fault resistance. Implementing these patterns makes reverse engineering and attacks like fault injection more difficult.
This document discusses research into automatic test case generation for train control systems. It describes a tool called CompleteTest that uses model checking to generate test cases from function block diagram programs that satisfy various logic coverage criteria. The tool was evaluated in a case study with Bombardier Transportation where it generated tests for some programs, but failed to terminate within 10 minutes for larger programs. Ongoing work involves addressing state space explosions, complementing model checking with other techniques, and measuring test effectiveness at finding faults.
Software testing tools (free and open source)Wael Mansour
This document discusses various tools used for test automation including Cobertura, Selenium, JMeter, Bugzilla, and Testia Tarantula. Cobertura is a code coverage tool that calculates test coverage percentages. Selenium is described as a tool for automating web application testing across browsers. JMeter is introduced as a load testing tool focused on analyzing performance of web applications. Bugzilla and Tarantula are mentioned as tools for bug tracking and project/test management respectively in agile software development. The document also discusses integrating these various tools together for a complete test automation framework.
Manual testing involves a human tester performing actions and verifying results, while automated testing uses a tool to playback and replay tests. The document discusses various software testing tools, including WinRunner for functional testing of Windows apps, SilkTest for web apps, and LoadRunner for performance and load testing. It provides overviews and demonstrations of the tools' functionality, such as recording and playing back tests, verifying results, and generating load to assess performance.
This document contains an agenda for a presentation on verification topics including basics, challenges, technologies, strategies, methodologies, and skills needed for corporate jobs. It also includes details about the presenter such as their name, role at Mentor Graphics, contact information, and background. The document dives into various aspects of verification like simulation, testbenches, formal verification, and limitations of simulation.
The document describes a SystemVerilog verification methodology that includes assertion-based verification, coverage-driven verification, constrained random verification, and use of scoreboards and checkers. It outlines the verification flow from design specifications through testbench development, integration and simulation, and discusses techniques like self-checking test cases, top-level and block-level environments, and maintaining bug reports.
The document discusses various types of test tools used at different stages of testing. It describes tools for test management, requirements management, incident management, configuration management, static testing, static analysis, modeling, test design, test data preparation, test execution, test harness, test comparators, coverage measurement, security testing, dynamic analysis, performance testing, load testing, stress testing, monitoring and thanks the reader. The tools support activities like scheduling tests, tracking bugs, reviewing code, generating test data, automating test execution, measuring code coverage and monitoring system performance.
This document discusses unit testing of the Core Flight Software (CFS) product line developed by NASA. It examines how the CFS architecture facilitates or impedes unit testing and how the architecture of test code can be defined based on the system architecture. The CFS uses a unit test architecture with mocks/stubs of dependent modules to enable isolated testing. It finds that defining abstract interfaces and exposing internal details controlled via architectural rules improves testability, and that complete dependency graphs do not inherently imply poor testability.
Formal verification involves proving the correctness of algorithms or systems with respect to a formal specification using mathematical techniques. It can be done by formally modeling a system and using theorem proving or model checking to verify that the model satisfies given properties. Theorem proving uses logical deduction to prove properties, while model checking automatically checks all possible states of a finite model against temporal logic properties. Both approaches have advantages and limitations, but formal verification can help find bugs and prove correctness of systems.
SE2018_Lec 20_ Test-Driven Development (TDD)Amr E. Mohamed
The document discusses test-driven development (TDD) and unit testing. It explains that TDD follows a cycle of writing an initial failing test case, producing just enough code to pass that test, and refactoring the code. Unit testing involves writing test cases for individual classes or functions, using assertions to validate expected outcomes. The JUnit framework is introduced for writing and running unit tests in Java.
Planning & building scalable test infrastructureVijayan Reddy
Vijayan Reddy discusses building a scalable test infrastructure by integrating various testing tools and tasks. He recommends taking a blue-print approach and using available commercial and open source tools. A meta controller can help orchestrate test execution across platforms and provide metrics collection, defect analysis tracing, and intelligent reporting. Building interfaces between source control, test case management, bug tracking, and test results can help scale the infrastructure. Automating tasks like builds, BVT, and reporting can improve efficiency.
IRSim implements an approach to establish traceability links among artifacts such as requirements, source code, and test cases. This presentation shows how we used IRSim on NASA software to establish traceability links for sofware analysis, program understanding, and quality improvement, etc.
This is the most important topic of OOAD named as Object Oriented Testing. It is used to prepare a good software which has no bug in it and it performs very fast. <a href="https://harisjamil.pro">Haris Jamil</a>
This document provides evaluation criteria for selecting automated test tools. It recommends evaluating criteria like object recognition abilities, platform support, recording and playback of browser and Java objects, scripting languages, debugging support, and more. The goals are to reduce the effort of evaluating tools and ensure they meet an organization's specific testing needs, environments, and skill levels. Over 80 hours may be needed to fully evaluate each tool against the outlined criteria.
This document discusses software testing tools and proposes a taxonomy for classifying them. It begins by addressing common myths and facts about software testing and developers. It then provides definitions of software testing and examples of over 20 specific software testing tools. The document proposes that a taxonomy is needed to classify tools to help testers choose the right ones. It reviews existing tool taxonomies and their shortcomings before concluding and thanking the reader.
The document discusses various techniques for testing commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components. It describes methods like the Analytic Hierarchy Process for COTS evaluation and selection. It also covers different approaches to provide testing information for COTS like the component metadata approach. The document discusses levels of testing like unit and integration testing as well as types of testing such as functionality, reliability and security testing.
The Impact of Test Ownership and Team Structure on the Reliability and Effect...Kim Herzig
The document discusses how test ownership and team structure can impact test reliability and effectiveness. It analyzes metrics related to test ownership, such as the number of test owners, owners who have left the company, and organizational structure of owners. The analysis found that tests with more concentrated ownership among fewer groups tended to be more effective, while distributed or scattered ownership across multiple groups made tests less effective. Tests were also less effective if owners who had left the company contributed to them. The organizational structure metrics proved to be good predictors of test effectiveness and excellent predictors of test reliability.
Formal verification is the process of proving or disproving properties of a system using precise mathematical methods. It provides guarantees that no simulations will violate specified properties. Formal verification can be applied at the block and system-on-chip levels to eliminate bugs early. However, current formal verification tools have limitations including capacity issues, generating coverage metrics from assertions, and handling large designs and multiple modes of operation. Improving formal verification requires efficient strategies and advancing tool capabilities.
Unit testing involves individually testing small units or modules of code, such as functions, classes, or programs, to determine if they are fit for use. The goal is to isolate each part of a program and verify that it works as intended, helps reduce defects early in the development process, and improves code design. Unit testing is typically done by developers to test their code meets its design before integration testing.
This document describes a method developed by Fraunhofer to reconstruct the as-built architecture of medical device software. The method discovers both static and runtime architectural structures from source code to help the FDA analyze software for safety issues during regulatory reviews when only documents and test results are submitted, not source code. It addresses FDA needs like identifying unsafe code constructs and assessing testability and safety. Sample outputs show tasks, communication, and module dependencies. The method formalizes the reconstruction using graph relations to aid static analysis tool usage and safety assurance cases.
Verifying Architectural Design Rules of a Flight Software Product LineDharmalingam Ganesan
This document discusses verifying architectural design rules of the Core Flight Software (CFS) product line. [1] It provides background on the CFS, which is a reusable flight software environment developed by NASA. [2] The analysis used tools to check that the CFS implementation follows documented rules regarding dependencies, decomposition, redundancy, and preprocessor usage. [3] It found some minor violations but concluded the CFS team performs rigorous design and code reviews.
The document discusses automated test generation for flight software using model-based testing. It describes problems with current manual testing approaches and how model-based testing can generate test cases from models of the system behavior. The Operating System Abstraction Layer (OSAL) used in NASA flight software is presented as a case study. Models of OSAL file system APIs were created and test cases in C were automatically generated from the models to test OSAL functionality.
Demonstrate a Chosen Ciphertext Attack when Crypto constructs are not used correctly. Detailed steps are given. The slides show how to attack the unauthenticated symmetric encryption in the OFB mode.
An approach for load-time hacking using LD_PRELOAD is presented.
We discuss a simple, yet intriguing, strategy for overcoming the limitations discussed in Part 1 (i.e., the first publication given in the reference) of reverse engineering and exploitation using LD_PRELOAD, a dynamic linking technique. In particular, we relax the need for exit(1) in the main function. The essence of the technique is that both the stack pointer (esp) and the base frame pointer (ebp) are carefully adjusted when the wrapper to the library function is called. The proposed solution allows us to safely return to libc after dynamically modifying the control flow in the wrapper to (library) functions.
Demonstrates remote code execution in the presence of modern OS security features. Stresses the importance of secure programming. Explains the binary reverse engineering process.
This document discusses the software testing process, including determining the test methodology, planning tests, test design and implementation. It covers determining the appropriate quality standard and testing strategy based on potential damage from failures. Planning involves prioritizing what to test based on risk and severity ratings. Sources for test cases, roles of testers, locations and criteria for ending tests are also addressed. The goal is effective testing with efficient use of resources.
The document discusses the software testing process, including planning tests, designing test cases, implementing tests, and generating test reports. It emphasizes the importance of prioritizing what to test based on risk and determining when to end testing based on factors like error detection rates. The overall goal is to design testing procedures that effectively detect errors while maximizing efficiency of resources like time and costs.
This document discusses the software testing process, including determining the test methodology, planning tests, test design and implementation. It covers determining the appropriate quality standard and testing strategy based on potential damage from failures. Factors for planning tests like what to test, sources for test cases, who performs tests, where and when tests are terminated are also outlined. Rating systems to prioritize modules, integrations and applications based on damage severity and risk are presented.
The document discusses the software testing process, including planning tests, designing test cases, implementing tests, and generating test reports. It emphasizes the importance of prioritizing what to test based on risk and determining when to end testing based on factors like error detection rates. The overall goal is to design testing procedures that effectively detect errors while maximizing efficiency of resources like time and costs.
The testing process
Determining the test methodology phase
Planning the tests
Test design
Test implementation
Test case design
Test case data components
Test case sources
Automated testing
The process of automated testing
Types of automated testing
Advantages and disadvantages of automated testing
Alpha and beta site testing program
This document discusses the software testing process. It covers determining the test methodology, planning tests, test design, implementation, and sources of test cases. Unit, integration, and system testing are discussed. Factors considered in planning tests include what to test, sources of test cases, who performs tests, where to perform them, and when to terminate testing. Priority ratings are assigned to applications to determine testing resource allocation. Live versus synthetic test cases and top-down versus bottom-up testing are also covered.
How to Actually DO High-volume Automated TestingTechWell
This document summarizes a presentation on high-volume automated testing (HiVAT). Cem Kaner and Carol Oliver will present on techniques for doing HiVAT testing, including examples implemented in Ruby code. They will describe three HiVAT techniques - functional equivalence testing, long-sequence regression testing, and a more flexible HiVAT architecture. The presentation will cover the basic ingredients needed for HiVAT, examples of the techniques, and ideas for making HiVAT work in practice.
The document discusses various software testing strategies, including unit testing, integration testing, validation testing, and system testing. It provides details on test strategies for both conventional and object-oriented software. For conventional software, it describes unit testing targets, integration techniques like top-down and bottom-up integration, and regression testing. For object-oriented software, it discusses class testing and thread-based or use-based testing strategies.
This document discusses context-driven test automation and describes four common contexts for automation: individual developer, development team, project, and product line. It analyzes two case studies - the ITE and xBVT test automation frameworks - and how they address common test automation tasks like distribution, setup/teardown, execution, verification and reporting differently depending on their context. The key lesson is that the approach that works best depends on who writes and uses the tests rather than a one-size-fits-all framework. Defining the context upfront helps determine how automation tasks are implemented.
The document provides information about a course on software engineering taught by Dr. P. Visu at Velammal Engineering College. It includes the course objectives, outcomes, syllabus, and learning resources. The key points are:
- The course aims to teach students about software processes, requirements engineering, object-oriented concepts, software design, testing, and project management.
- The outcomes include comparing process models, formulating requirements engineering concepts, understanding object-oriented fundamentals, applying design procedures, and evaluating testing techniques and project management.
- The syllabus covers topics like software processes, requirements analysis, object-oriented concepts, software design, and testing across 5 units over 45 periods.
- Recomm
Automated testing involves developing and executing test scripts using an automated test tool to verify test requirements. It has advantages like reduced costs, increased efficiency, and improved quality. However, automated testing also has limitations such as an inability to test certain aspects that require physical interaction. The automated test life-cycle methodology involves planning, designing, executing, and reviewing automated tests. Key steps include deciding what to automate, acquiring suitable tools, and analyzing the testing process.
Automated testing involves managing and executing test scripts to verify requirements using an automated test tool. It has advantages like reduced costs, increased efficiency, and improved quality compared to manual testing. However, automated testing also has limitations such as not all tests can be automated. There are various automated test tools and methodologies that can be used at different stages of the software development life cycle. The document then provides details on tools and methods for automated testing used at CAR IMM Iasi such as DOORS for requirements management, SiTemppo for test management, and TUX, TTCN-3, and Silk Test for automated testing.
Automated testing involves developing and executing test scripts using an automated test tool to verify test requirements. It has advantages like reduced costs, increased efficiency, and improved quality. However, automated testing also has limitations such as an inability to test certain aspects that require physical interaction. The automated test life-cycle methodology involves planning, designing, executing, and reviewing automated tests. Key steps include deciding what to automate, acquiring suitable tools, and analyzing the testing process.
This document provides information on a course titled "Software Engineering" taught by Dr. P. Visu at Velammal Engineering College. The objectives of the course are outlined, including understanding software project phases, requirements engineering, object-oriented concepts, enterprise integration, and testing and project management techniques. Six course outcomes are also listed relating to comparing process models, requirements engineering, object-oriented fundamentals, software design, testing techniques, and project estimation and scheduling. The document then provides details on the 5 course units covering software process and agile development, requirements analysis, object-oriented concepts, software design, and testing and project management. Learning resources including textbooks and online links are also listed.
This ppt covers the following
A strategic approach to testing
Test strategies for conventional software
Test strategies for object-oriented software
Validation testing
System testing
The art of debugging
This document provides an overview and introduction to automated testing. It discusses different levels of automated testing like unit testing, integration testing, and acceptance testing. It describes how automated testing fits into a delivery pipeline to support continuous integration and deployment. Key benefits of automated testing are outlined like enabling refactoring, improving code quality, and reducing costs. Common patterns for automated testing like the four phase test pattern and using test doubles are also presented. The document aims to establish context and provide best practices for designing and implementing automated tests.
This document provides an introduction to automation testing. It discusses the need for automation testing to improve speed, reliability and test coverage. The document outlines when tests should be automated such as for regression testing or data-driven testing. It also discusses automation tool options and the process for automating tests. While automation testing provides benefits like time savings, it also has limitations such as the need for programming skills and maintenance of test code. Key challenges of automation testing include unrealistic expectations of tools and dependency on third party integrations.
Similar to Assessing Model-Based Testing: An Empirical Study Conducted in Industry (20)
The document discusses serialization and deserialization security vulnerabilities. It provides an overview of serialization and deserialization, how attackers can exploit them, and some best practices to prevent exploits. Specifically, it demonstrates how the .NET BinaryFormatter can be insecure by allowing arbitrary code execution through deserialization of untrusted data streams containing unexpected types or callbacks. The presentation recommends avoiding BinaryFormatter and validating serialized data to prevent attacks.
This document discusses reverse architecting software by extracting relationships from source code using relation algebra. It describes extracting relations from code without compiling or linking, storing them in a database, and applying relation algebra operations like join and inverse to abstract the relations. The abstracted relations can then be visualized as graphs or tables to understand aspects of the software architecture like inter-task communication and message queue usage. Reverse architecting is challenging but relation algebra can help reformulate many analysis questions and filter irrelevant data to meet analysis goals.
The document summarizes how predictable random number generators like rand() can be exploited to identify cryptographic keys. It shows that rand() has a predictable behavior based on its seed value. An attacker who knows the time of key generation can initialize rand() with seeds from that time interval and generate a small list of potential keys that need to be tried. As a solution, it recommends using the more secure random number generator from /dev/urandom which is less predictable.
We study the behavior of the RSA trapdoor function by repeatedly encrypting the ciphertext sent over the public channel. We discuss the problem of finding a cycle in order to reverse the plaintext from the given ciphertext. Simple demos and algorithms/python programs are also presented. While the attack is not necessarily practical, it is educational to learn how the RSA trapdoor function behaves.
We look into the nitty-gritty details of the RSA key generation algorithm. We study how RSA can be exploited when the public exponent e is not chosen carefully. We examine why many digital certificates use e=65537. We also experiment with Hastad's broadcast attack for short RSA exponents in particular.
We study the internal structure of the SRP key exchange protocol and experiment with it. SRP establishes a shared encryption key between communicating parties using passwords that were shared out-of-band. We perform basic cryptanalysis of SRP using open-source implementations. We present a demo of how SRP was compromised due to an implementation bug, allowing the attacker to login without the password. The author of the Go-SRP library promptly fixed the issue on the very same day we reported the vulnerability.
We allow Eve to modify DH parameters as well as public keys of Alice and Bob. This allows Eve to derive the secret key and break the DH crypto system. We demonstrate that the DH key exchange algorithm should not be used without digital signatures.
This was an invited talk at the Central Middle School, Maryland. Without going into a lot of math, I try to explain the fundamental key exchange problem. It was a blast. 8th graders enjoyed it as much as I enjoyed it.
Can we reveal the RSA private exponent d from its public key <e, n>? We study this question for two specific cases: e = 3 and e = 65537. Using demos, we verify that RSA reveals the most significant half of the private exponent d when the public exponent e is small. For example, for 2048-bit RSA, the most significant 1024 bits are revealed!
Computing the Square Roots of Unity to break RSA using Quantum AlgorithmsDharmalingam Ganesan
We study the problem of finding the square roots of unity in a finite group in order to factor composite numbers used in RSA. We implemented Peter Shor’s algorithm to find the square root of unity. Experimental results showed that finding the square roots of unity in a finite group multiplicative group is “hard”.
We experiment with Wiener's attack to break RSA when the secret exponent is short, meaning it is smaller than one quarter of the public modulus size. We discuss cryptanalysis details and present demos of the attack. Our very minor extension of Wiener's attack is also discussed.
If we have an RSA 2048 bits configuration, but our private exponent d is only about 512 bits, then the above attack breaks RSA in a few seconds.
This work uses Continued Fractions to derive the private keys from the given public keys. It turned out that one can derive the private exponent d by approximating it as a ratio of e/n, both are public values.
In a default settings of standard RSA libaries, this attack and my minor extension are not relevant (to the best of our knowledge). However, if we configure our library to choose a very large public encryption exponent e, then our private decryption exponent d could be short enough to mount an attack.
An RSA private key is made of a few private variables. We analyze how these private variables are chained together. Further, we study if one of the private variables is leaked, can we derive the other private variables? Demos of the algorithms are also provided.
This document analyzes the security implications of sharing the same RSA modulus n between two users. It presents three algorithms that an attacker could use to break RSA encryption if the public keys for two users share the same n value. Algorithm 1 works if the public exponents are relatively prime. Algorithm 2 works for small public exponents by factoring n. Algorithm 3 directly factors n from the private exponent. The conclusion is that RSA is breakable if n is not unique per user.
The slides demonstrate how to reverse the plaintext from the RSA encrypted ciphertext using an oracle that answers the question: is the last bit of the message 0 or 1?
This document describes an RSA two-person game designed to demonstrate how an adversary could exploit the homomorphic property of raw RSA encryption to break the system. It involves a challenger generating an RSA public/private key pair and encrypting a secret message. The adversary is able to obtain encryptions of arbitrary messages and uses the homomorphic property that the product of ciphertexts corresponds to the product of plaintexts to deduce the secret. Through a series of chosen plaintext/ciphertext queries, the adversary is able to compute the secret plaintext and win the game. The goal is to understand the vulnerabilities in raw RSA and how padding can strengthen the system.
The slides demonstrate how to break RSA when used incorrectly without integrity checks. The man-in-the-middle is allowed to edit the RSA public exponent e in such a way that the Extended Euclidean Algorithm can be employed to reconstruct the plaintexts from the given ciphertexts.
Slides demonstrate how to break RSA when no padding is applied. I replicated the meet-in-the-middle attack discussed in the existing Crypto literature.
Unveiling the Advantages of Agile Software Development.pdfbrainerhub1
Learn about Agile Software Development's advantages. Simplify your workflow to spur quicker innovation. Jump right in! We have also discussed the advantages.
Most important New features of Oracle 23c for DBAs and Developers. You can get more idea from my youtube channel video from https://youtu.be/XvL5WtaC20A
How Can Hiring A Mobile App Development Company Help Your Business Grow?ToXSL Technologies
ToXSL Technologies is an award-winning Mobile App Development Company in Dubai that helps businesses reshape their digital possibilities with custom app services. As a top app development company in Dubai, we offer highly engaging iOS & Android app solutions. https://rb.gy/necdnt
UI5con 2024 - Boost Your Development Experience with UI5 Tooling ExtensionsPeter Muessig
The UI5 tooling is the development and build tooling of UI5. It is built in a modular and extensible way so that it can be easily extended by your needs. This session will showcase various tooling extensions which can boost your development experience by far so that you can really work offline, transpile your code in your project to use even newer versions of EcmaScript (than 2022 which is supported right now by the UI5 tooling), consume any npm package of your choice in your project, using different kind of proxies, and even stitching UI5 projects during development together to mimic your target environment.
WWDC 2024 Keynote Review: For CocoaCoders AustinPatrick Weigel
Overview of WWDC 2024 Keynote Address.
Covers: Apple Intelligence, iOS18, macOS Sequoia, iPadOS, watchOS, visionOS, and Apple TV+.
Understandable dialogue on Apple TV+
On-device app controlling AI.
Access to ChatGPT with a guest appearance by Chief Data Thief Sam Altman!
App Locking! iPhone Mirroring! And a Calculator!!
Everything You Need to Know About X-Sign: The eSign Functionality of XfilesPr...XfilesPro
Wondering how X-Sign gained popularity in a quick time span? This eSign functionality of XfilesPro DocuPrime has many advancements to offer for Salesforce users. Explore them now!
Transform Your Communication with Cloud-Based IVR SolutionsTheSMSPoint
Discover the power of Cloud-Based IVR Solutions to streamline communication processes. Embrace scalability and cost-efficiency while enhancing customer experiences with features like automated call routing and voice recognition. Accessible from anywhere, these solutions integrate seamlessly with existing systems, providing real-time analytics for continuous improvement. Revolutionize your communication strategy today with Cloud-Based IVR Solutions. Learn more at: https://thesmspoint.com/channel/cloud-telephony
Need for Speed: Removing speed bumps from your Symfony projects ⚡️Łukasz Chruściel
No one wants their application to drag like a car stuck in the slow lane! Yet it’s all too common to encounter bumpy, pothole-filled solutions that slow the speed of any application. Symfony apps are not an exception.
In this talk, I will take you for a spin around the performance racetrack. We’ll explore common pitfalls - those hidden potholes on your application that can cause unexpected slowdowns. Learn how to spot these performance bumps early, and more importantly, how to navigate around them to keep your application running at top speed.
We will focus in particular on tuning your engine at the application level, making the right adjustments to ensure that your system responds like a well-oiled, high-performance race car.
Microservice Teams - How the cloud changes the way we workSven Peters
A lot of technical challenges and complexity come with building a cloud-native and distributed architecture. The way we develop backend software has fundamentally changed in the last ten years. Managing a microservices architecture demands a lot of us to ensure observability and operational resiliency. But did you also change the way you run your development teams?
Sven will talk about Atlassian’s journey from a monolith to a multi-tenanted architecture and how it affected the way the engineering teams work. You will learn how we shifted to service ownership, moved to more autonomous teams (and its challenges), and established platform and enablement teams.
Measures in SQL (SIGMOD 2024, Santiago, Chile)Julian Hyde
SQL has attained widespread adoption, but Business Intelligence tools still use their own higher level languages based upon a multidimensional paradigm. Composable calculations are what is missing from SQL, and we propose a new kind of column, called a measure, that attaches a calculation to a table. Like regular tables, tables with measures are composable and closed when used in queries.
SQL-with-measures has the power, conciseness and reusability of multidimensional languages but retains SQL semantics. Measure invocations can be expanded in place to simple, clear SQL.
To define the evaluation semantics for measures, we introduce context-sensitive expressions (a way to evaluate multidimensional expressions that is consistent with existing SQL semantics), a concept called evaluation context, and several operations for setting and modifying the evaluation context.
A talk at SIGMOD, June 9–15, 2024, Santiago, Chile
Authors: Julian Hyde (Google) and John Fremlin (Google)
https://doi.org/10.1145/3626246.3653374
Hand Rolled Applicative User ValidationCode KataPhilip Schwarz
Could you use a simple piece of Scala validation code (granted, a very simplistic one too!) that you can rewrite, now and again, to refresh your basic understanding of Applicative operators <*>, <*, *>?
The goal is not to write perfect code showcasing validation, but rather, to provide a small, rough-and ready exercise to reinforce your muscle-memory.
Despite its grandiose-sounding title, this deck consists of just three slides showing the Scala 3 code to be rewritten whenever the details of the operators begin to fade away.
The code is my rough and ready translation of a Haskell user-validation program found in a book called Finding Success (and Failure) in Haskell - Fall in love with applicative functors.
This diagram shows the overview of our approach. I would just like to give you a quick overview, on the following slides we’ll go into the details of the process.
The first step that you have to do is Analyze the requirements and support documentation of the system. This can include existing test cases of the system.This information is used to manually build the model of the system that you would like to test.
In the next step, the tester has to map the model’s states and transitions to a test execution framework. In the hello world example we would have to build a test execution framework that can interact with the buttons of the hello world program.
In step 3 the tester automatically creates abstract test cases from the model, abstract test cases are basically a list with states and transitions from the model.
In order to then get executable test cases the abstract test cases have to be instantiated which means that for each state and transition the associated actions from the test execution framework have to be embedded in the test case.
In step 5 the test are executed and the results are then analyzed in step 6 in order to identify issues in the system.
This diagram shows the overview of our approach. I would just like to give you a quick overview, on the following slides we’ll go into the details of the process.
The first step that you have to do is Analyze the requirements and support documentation of the system. This can include existing test cases of the system.This information is used to manually build the model of the system that you would like to test.
In the next step, the tester has to map the model’s states and transitions to a test execution framework. In the hello world example we would have to build a test execution framework that can interact with the buttons of the hello world program.
In step 3 the tester automatically creates abstract test cases from the model, abstract test cases are basically a list with states and transitions from the model.
In order to then get executable test cases the abstract test cases have to be instantiated which means that for each state and transition the associated actions from the test execution framework have to be embedded in the test case.
In step 5 the test are executed and the results are then analyzed in step 6 in order to identify issues in the system.
This diagram shows the overview of our approach. I would just like to give you a quick overview, on the following slides we’ll go into the details of the process.
The first step that you have to do is Analyze the requirements and support documentation of the system. This can include existing test cases of the system.This information is used to manually build the model of the system that you would like to test.
In the next step, the tester has to map the model’s states and transitions to a test execution framework. In the hello world example we would have to build a test execution framework that can interact with the buttons of the hello world program.
In step 3 the tester automatically creates abstract test cases from the model, abstract test cases are basically a list with states and transitions from the model.
In order to then get executable test cases the abstract test cases have to be instantiated which means that for each state and transition the associated actions from the test execution framework have to be embedded in the test case.
In step 5 the test are executed and the results are then analyzed in step 6 in order to identify issues in the system.
This diagram shows the overview of our approach. I would just like to give you a quick overview, on the following slides we’ll go into the details of the process.
The first step that you have to do is Analyze the requirements and support documentation of the system. This can include existing test cases of the system.This information is used to manually build the model of the system that you would like to test.
In the next step, the tester has to map the model’s states and transitions to a test execution framework. In the hello world example we would have to build a test execution framework that can interact with the buttons of the hello world program.
In step 3 the tester automatically creates abstract test cases from the model, abstract test cases are basically a list with states and transitions from the model.
In order to then get executable test cases the abstract test cases have to be instantiated which means that for each state and transition the associated actions from the test execution framework have to be embedded in the test case.
In step 5 the test are executed and the results are then analyzed in step 6 in order to identify issues in the system.
This diagram shows the overview of our approach. I would just like to give you a quick overview, on the following slides we’ll go into the details of the process.
The first step that you have to do is Analyze the requirements and support documentation of the system. This can include existing test cases of the system.This information is used to manually build the model of the system that you would like to test.
In the next step, the tester has to map the model’s states and transitions to a test execution framework. In the hello world example we would have to build a test execution framework that can interact with the buttons of the hello world program.
In step 3 the tester automatically creates abstract test cases from the model, abstract test cases are basically a list with states and transitions from the model.
In order to then get executable test cases the abstract test cases have to be instantiated which means that for each state and transition the associated actions from the test execution framework have to be embedded in the test case.
In step 5 the test are executed and the results are then analyzed in step 6 in order to identify issues in the system.
This diagram shows the overview of our approach. I would just like to give you a quick overview, on the following slides we’ll go into the details of the process.
The first step that you have to do is Analyze the requirements and support documentation of the system. This can include existing test cases of the system.This information is used to manually build the model of the system that you would like to test.
In the next step, the tester has to map the model’s states and transitions to a test execution framework. In the hello world example we would have to build a test execution framework that can interact with the buttons of the hello world program.
In step 3 the tester automatically creates abstract test cases from the model, abstract test cases are basically a list with states and transitions from the model.
In order to then get executable test cases the abstract test cases have to be instantiated which means that for each state and transition the associated actions from the test execution framework have to be embedded in the test case.
In step 5 the test are executed and the results are then analyzed in step 6 in order to identify issues in the system.
This diagram shows the overview of our approach. I would just like to give you a quick overview, on the following slides we’ll go into the details of the process.
The first step that you have to do is Analyze the requirements and support documentation of the system. This can include existing test cases of the system.This information is used to manually build the model of the system that you would like to test.
In the next step, the tester has to map the model’s states and transitions to a test execution framework. In the hello world example we would have to build a test execution framework that can interact with the buttons of the hello world program.
In step 3 the tester automatically creates abstract test cases from the model, abstract test cases are basically a list with states and transitions from the model.
In order to then get executable test cases the abstract test cases have to be instantiated which means that for each state and transition the associated actions from the test execution framework have to be embedded in the test case.
In step 5 the test are executed and the results are then analyzed in step 6 in order to identify issues in the system.