Thanks all for the information!

I was thinking along the lines of 'anything can be measured' as Josh
said, but Josh made a great point about 'not sure that everything can
be predicted'.

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Josh More <[email protected]> wrote:
> This same issue has been cycling around in the Agile community for years.
>
> I do believe that anything can be measured... but I'm not sure that
> everything can be predicted. There are a lot of variables in the mix:
> skill of tester, motivation of tester, time available, tools
> available, position on the attack/defense cycle, rules of engagement,
> etc.
>
> As a result, after arguing back and forth with people for the last
> five years or so, I have completely abandoned the idea of metrics with
> a goal of full coverage.
>
> Instead, I frame the discussion around the value of the data and the
> value of continued service and compare that to the cost of an
> assessment.  We figure out how much they want to spend and I convert
> that into hours.  They then get that much analysis.
>
> Not every client goes for it, but really, since most engagements I've
> done turn up more findings than any organization can truly address
> before it's time for the next assessment, narrowing the coverage makes
> a lot more sense (assuming that known exploration gaps are documented
> so they may be hit in the next cycle).
>
> -Josh More
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Ryan Dewhurst <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was wondering how to make Test Effort Estimation more efficient on
>> my black box web app tests. I think this is easier to do when doing
>> white box tests because you have a good metric, Lines of Coce (LOC),
>> but in black box testing a metric might be less easy to find.
>>
>> What I normally do and I expect most other people do is give an
>> estimation based on past experiences, but in my opinion this can be
>> time consuming and sometimes inaccurate. Time consuming because you
>> have to manually view each application to be tested to mentally
>> compare it. Inaccurate because I'm human and on that particular day I
>> might be feeling *really* motivated and under-estimate the amount of
>> time (effort) needed or vise-versa. This I feel can lead to inaccuracy
>> and wasted time.
>>
>> Another approach is to try and find a metric to use, that metric could
>> then be quantified into man hours.
>>
>> A reasonable metric (by far not perfect) I can think of when doing a
>> typical black box web app test (using automated tools and manual
>> interaction) is the amount of unique dynamic pages the application
>> has. This can normally and quite easily be obtained.
>>
>> Let's say it takes 1 man hour to test 10 pages. (plucking these
>> numbers out of the air)
>>
>> If an app has 100 unique pages, the Test Effort Estimation would be 10
>> man hours.
>>
>> So my questions are:
>>
>> Do you think there are better metrics to use other than number of unique 
>> pages?
>> Do you think there are better ways to do Test Effort Estimation on
>> black box web application tests?
>> How many man hours do you think it should typically take to test 1 unique 
>> page?
>>
>> I think it is an interesting topic which hasn't been discussed much as
>> far as I could tell.
>>
>> Ryan
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pauldotcom mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
> _______________________________________________
> Pauldotcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
_______________________________________________
Pauldotcom mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com

Reply via email to