Skip to main content

Session Based Testing - brown bag

Hi there,

I have just finished a brown bag about Session Based testing, my sources are mainly the work of John and James Bach.

Here is my prezi 

My charter:

CHARTER
-----------------------------------------------
Retest all tasks and areas around them in ILIAS-EV 6.1.0
#AREAS

Build | ILIAS-EV 6.1.0
Strategy | Retesting & Exploration
START
-----------------------------------------------
16/7/14 09:56
TESTER
-----------------------------------------------
my name
TASK BREAKDOWN
-----------------------------------------------
#DURATION
short - 56 minutes
#SESSION SETUP
0 - was prepared already thanks to the automation run
#CHARTER VS. OPPORTUNITY
-
DATA FILES
-----------------------------------------------
-
TEST NOTES
-----------------------------------------------
#Task2120:
Report creation and deletion is now stored in Audit Trail
Tested for reports from "Report Display" & "Export Display"
Tested Audit Trail filtering with really wide date spread (~30 years)
Exports from "Plausibility" tab does not create an entry in Audit Trail
#Task3088:
Reading documentation - its only on RM 2014 -> not possible to prepare data in this session
Retested only that it does not affect year 2011
#Task3089:
Its only on RM 2014 -> not possible to prepare data in this session
Retested only that it does not affect year 2011
Tried to create a RM for 2014 - found BUG3155
Checking if it also exists in ILIAS-CM - no
#Task 3140:
Description not clear enough to test sufficiently


BUGS
-----------------------------------------------
#BUG3164
Exception in RM Creation - Guideline Button

ISSUES
-----------------------------------------------
#ISSUE
Report creation creates several identical entries in the Audit trail
-->

Additional links:

Comments

  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Testing impact on security

... or the impact when testing is lacking?

Security breaches, hacks, exploits, major ransomware attacks - their frequency
seem to increase recently. These can result in financial, credibility and data
loss, and increasingly the endangerment of human lives.

I don't want to propose that testing will always prevent these situations.
There were probably testers present (and I'm sure often also security testers) when
such systems were created. I think that there was simply a general lack of
risk-awareness on these projects.

There are many tools and techniques from  a pure technical point of view to harden the software in security context. Some of them have automated scans which crawl through your website and might discover the low hanging fruits of security weaknesses (ZAP, Burpsuite...), without much technical knowledge from the person operating it. The more important aspect is however the mindset with which you approach the product. The tester is often the first person to discov…

Kali Linux 101

Linux was always a bit too 'geeky' thing for me. My recent time on bench provided me however with time and motivation to go into this "terra incognita".
The intention was originally to learn some foundations of security testing. After a while I discovered that Kali Linux could provide also benefits for the everyday testing routine. Following is a simple set of tools that will support and enhance your testing.
whatweb Whatweb is a web scanner which provides information about the technologies used on the website, mail addresses found and many more
Example (type into terminal in Kali Linux): whatweb 0-v https://www.houseoftest.rocks/


whois  Provides domain and legal information about the target website (where is it registered, owner, address, etc.)
Example: whois houseoftest.rocks



cewl Outputs all the words contained in the target website. You never know when such feature comes handy. You can output also into a file of course. Example: cewl https://www.houseoftest.ro…

Thrown into automation

Situation & Problem I was thrown into an automation test project.

Concretely test automation of 3 different applications (different in purpose, look, structure, behavior) which regression testing was covered only by a automation test suite that was written in AutoIt and the size of the code was quite complex and huge for a new person in the automation.
Well, that was not the problem, it is a description of the situation.

The problems weren't initially visible. I was never automating before, so I needed to learn quite a bit of the code & got to know all the applications that were part of the project.

The problems were not so appealing at the start, but I would formulate then as: Maintenance of the scripts took too longBy new versions of the application, it took some time to adjust the scripts to the changesThis caused delay in information flow from testers to managers & developersThe changes in the application were not clearly communicated to testersTesting was purely t…