CTAL-TTA Exam Dumps - Certified Tester Advanced Level Technical Test Analyst

Increasing automated test coverage frees up valuable time for testers, allowing them to focus more on exploratory testing, particularly in high-risk areas. This approach leverages the efficiency of automation to handle routine, repeatable testing tasks, while human testers can focus their expertise on more complex, risk-prone areas that require creative and critical thinking .

In a risk-based approach to testing, various roles and responsibilities are distributed among the team members. Here’s an analysis of the activities listed in the options:

A. Understanding the probability of each technical product risk: This is indeed within the scope of the Technical Test Analyst's responsibilities. They need to evaluate and understand the likelihood of technical risks to plan appropriate testing strategies.

B. Assessing the likelihood of identified security risks: This also falls under the Technical Test Analyst’s role, as they are expected to evaluate different types of risks, including security risks, and understand their likelihood.

C. Assessing the business impact of identified performance risks: This task is more aligned with the role of a Business Analyst or Product Owner. The business impact assessment usually requires a deep understanding of business operations, financial implications, and stakeholder priorities, which are typically beyond the technical focus of a Technical Test Analyst.

D. Designing tests to mitigate identified reliability risks: Designing tests to address reliability risks is a core activity for Technical Test Analysts. They are expected to create test cases and scenarios that target identified reliability issues to ensure the system’s stability and robustness.

Therefore, the activity that a Technical Test Analyst is NOT usually expected to perform is C. Assessing the business impact of identified performance risks.

This conclusion is supported by the ISTQB CTAL-TTA syllabus, which outlines the responsibilities and focus areas for Technical Test Analysts, highlighting their involvement in understanding and mitigating technical risks rather than assessing business impacts​​.

The fault attack described involves forcing all possible incoming errors from software/operating system interfaces. The type of failure being sought is one where the application does not handle erroneous or unexpected input correctly, which can lead to crashes or other unintended behavior. Thus, an application crash when unsupported characters are pasted into an input field is a typical failure that this kind of fault attack would aim to uncover.

Analysis:

Understanding the characteristics of data-driven and keyword-driven automation is crucial for identifying the correct statements.

Correct Pairing:

C. Data Driven = a; Keyword-driven = c:

Data Driven = a: "The data used for a test is held external to the automated script" is a key characteristic of data-driven testing, where test data is stored separately from the test scripts, allowing the same script to run with different data sets.

Keyword-driven = c: "It uses a high-level language to separate the action to be performed on the test data from the test script" is characteristic of keyword-driven testing, where keywords representing actions are used to describe test steps, separating the business logic from the test scripts.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

A. Data Driven = a; Keyword-driven = d: Statement d does not accurately describe keyword-driven testing.

B. Data Driven = b; Keyword-driven = c: Statement b does not accurately describe data-driven testing.

D. Data Driven = d; Keyword-driven = d: Statement d is not accurate for either data-driven or keyword-driven testing.

References:

The ISTQB CTAL-TTA syllabus and standard practices in test automation clearly differentiate between data-driven and keyword-driven testing methodologies.

Sources:

ISTQB-CTAL-TTA Syllabus

General knowledge on test automation methodologies.

100% statement coverage means that every line of code is executed at least once during testing. Based on the provided pseudo-code and the test cases given:

Test 1 executes the MIN = B statement when A and B are equal.

Test 2 executes the MIN = A statement and skips the inner IF since B is not equal to 2*A.

All statements within the code have been executed by these two tests, hence no additional test cases are needed to achieve 100% statement coverage.

According to the INVEST criteria, the Testable and Small criteria have not been satisfied for the user story provided. Option B is correct.

INVEST Criteria: The INVEST model stipulates that user stories should be Independent, Negotiable, Valuable, Estimable, Small, and Testable.

Analysis of the User Story: The scope of the user story and its acceptance criteria suggests it is too broad (thus not 'Small') and the details provided, especially regarding response times and system notifications, imply potential challenges in effectively testing the story (thus possibly not 'Testable') without further refinement or breaking down the story into smaller, more manageable pieces.

The size and complexity of the requirements indicate that the story might be better classified as an epic, needing decomposition into smaller, more specific user stories that can be more feasibly addressed within agile iterations .

Tools that support component testing and the build process are designed to provide a controlled environment where individual units or components of the software can be tested in isolation. This is typically done using stubs, which simulate the behavior of missing components, and drivers, which simulate the behavior of a user or calling program. This isolated environment is essential for unit testing because it allows testers to find defects within the boundaries of a single component before integrating it into the larger system.

Analysis:

The significant non-functional defects recorded for the BestForFood system indicate issues that could be mitigated by appropriate non-functional testing strategies:

Portability Testing:

Ensures that the application can operate in different environments without issues. This could have addressed the defect related to the layout and navigation consistency across different websites (Defect A).

Compatibility Testing:

Ensures that the application works well with other systems and environments. This could have helped in preventing the performance issues noticed in the BestForPensions and BestForMortgages websites after the deployment of BestForFood (Defect B).

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

C. The time taken to diagnose, repair and re-test production defects: This is more related to maintainability and operational processes.

D. BestForFood performance impacted by data growth: This is better addressed through performance and scalability testing.

E. Installation time exceeding agreed timescales: This is related to deployment and operational efficiency.

References:

The ISTQB CTAL-TTA syllabus and standard non-functional testing practices emphasize the importance of portability and compatibility testing for ensuring smooth operation across different environments and systems.

Sources:

ISTQB-CTAL-TTA Syllabus

General knowledge on non-functional testing practices.