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

The relationship between impact analysis and regression testing in maintenance testing is that impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed on an existing software product after it has been delivered or deployed, in order to ensure that it still meets its requirements and functions correctly after a change or a modification. Maintenance testing can be triggered by various reasons, such as corrective maintenance (fixing defects), adaptive maintenance (adapting to new environments), perfective maintenance (improving performance), preventive maintenance (avoiding future problems), etc. Impact analysis is a technique that is used to assess the extent and nature of changes introduced by maintenance activities on the software product or project. Impact analysis helps to identify which parts of the software product are affected by the changes, which parts need to be modified or updated accordingly, which parts need to be retested or verified for correctness or compatibility, etc. Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after a change or a modification. Regression testing helps to detect any side effects or unintended consequences of maintenance activities on the software product’s functionality or quality. Regression testing can be performed at various levels and scopes depending on the impact analysis results. Therefore, in maintenance testing, impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 20.

A defect is a flaw in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function. A defect can cause harm to the end customer, the company, or both, depending on the impact and severity of the failure. In this case, the defect in the code causes the system to lock down accounts that have an overdraft higher than $1000, instead of $10,000. This can cause harm to the end customer, as they may lose access to their funds and face inconvenience or financial difficulties. This can also cause harm to the company, as they may lose customer trust and satisfaction, face legal issues or complaints, or incur additional costs for fixing the defect and restoring the accounts. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 1, page 3-4.

The extent of testing required for a software product depends on various factors, such as the level of risk, the budget, and the time available. The level of risk reflects the potential impact of failures on the stakeholders and the environment. The budget determines how much resources can be allocated for testing. The time available defines the schedule and deadlines for testing activities. The particular tester involved in testing is not a deciding factor for the extent of testing required, as testing should be based on objective criteria and not on personal preferences or abilities. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 14-15.

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 invalid References: 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

This answer is correct because test implementation is the activity where test work products, such as test cases, test data, test scripts, test harnesses, test stubs, or virtual services, are created and verified. Test implementation also involves setting up the test environment and preparing the test execution schedule. A virtual service emulating a real third-party service and the automated test scripts that interact with that service are examples of test work products that are typically created during test implementation. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.2.2.3

Covering all transitions at least once is the highest coverage criterion for state transition based test cases, because it ensures that every possible change of state is tested at least once. This means that all the events that trigger the transitions, as well as the actions and outputs that result from the transitions, are verified. Covering all transitions at least once also implies covering all states at least once, but not vice versa. Therefore, option D is not the highest coverage criterion. Option C is the lowest coverage criterion, because it only tests the initial and final states of the system or component, without checking the intermediate states or transitions. Option A is incorrect, because the coverage criteria for state transition based test cases can be determined and compared based on the number of transitions and states covered. References = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 4.2.3, page 49-50.

Equivalence classes partitioning is a technique that divides the input data and output results of a software component into partitions of equivalent data. Each partition should contain data that is treated in the same way by the component. Equivalence classes partitioning can be used to reduce the number of test cases by selecting one representative value from each partition. For the ZIP code field, there are four equivalence classes based on the given rules:

Valid ZIP code format and valid ZIP code value (e.g., 12345)

Valid ZIP code format and invalid ZIP code value (e.g., 99999)

Invalid ZIP code format and valid ZIP code value (e.g., 1234)

Invalid ZIP code format and invalid ZIP code value (e.g., ABCDE) Therefore, four test cases are required to test this field, one for each equivalence class. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 37-38.

The following statements about reviews are true:

I) In walkthroughs the review meeting is typically led by the author. A walkthrough is a type of review that has a predefined objective and agenda but no formal process or roles. A walkthrough is typically led by the author of the work product under review, who guides the participants through a scenario and solicits feedback.

IV) Management rarely participates in technical review meetings. A technical review is a type of review that has a predefined objective and agenda but no formal process or roles. A technical review is typically performed by peers with technical expertise in order to evaluate technical aspects of a work product. Management rarely participates in technical review meetings, as they may not have sufficient technical knowledge or skills to contribute effectively. The following statements about reviews are false:

II) Inspection is characterized by an open-ended review meeting. An inspection is a type of review that follows a defined process with formal entry and exit criteria and roles and responsibilities for participants. An inspection is characterized by a structured review meeting with a fixed duration and agenda.

III) Preparation before the review meeting is part of informal reviews. Preparation before the review meeting is part of formal reviews, such as inspections or technical reviews. Preparation involves checking