Search Results

Search found 22139 results on 886 pages for 'security testing'.

Page 114/886 | < Previous Page | 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121  | Next Page >

• Are programming languages perfect?

  - by mohabitar

  I'm not sure if I'm being naive, as I'm still a student, but a curious question came to my mind. In another thread here, a user stated that in order to protect against piracy of your software, you must have perfect software. So is it possible to have perfect software? This is an extremely silly hypothetical situation, but if you were to gather the most talented and gifted programmers in the world and have them spend years trying to create 'perfect' software, could they be successful? Could it be that not a single exploitable bug could be created? Or are there flaws in programming languages that can still, no matter how hard you try, cause bugs that allow your program to be hijacked? As you can tell, I know nothing about security, but essentially what I'm asking is: is the reason why software is easily exploitable the fact that imperfect human beings create it, or that imperfect programming languages are being used?

  Read the article

• Mocking concrete class - Not recommended

  - by Mik378

  I've just read an excerpt of "Growing Object-Oriented Software" book which explains some reasons why mocking concrete class is not recommended. Here some sample code of a unit-test for the MusicCentre class: public class MusicCentreTest { @Test public void startsCdPlayerAtTimeRequested() { final MutableTime scheduledTime = new MutableTime(); CdPlayer player = new CdPlayer() { @Override public void scheduleToStartAt(Time startTime) { scheduledTime.set(startTime); } } MusicCentre centre = new MusicCentre(player); centre.startMediaAt(LATER); assertEquals(LATER, scheduledTime.get()); } } And his first explanation: The problem with this approach is that it leaves the relationship between the objects implicit. I hope we've made clear by now that the intention of Test-Driven Development with Mock Objects is to discover relationships between objects. If I subclass, there's nothing in the domain code to make such a relationship visible, just methods on an object. This makes it harder to see if the service that supports this relationship might be relevant elsewhere and I'll have to do the analysis again next time I work with the class. I can't figure out exactly what he means when he says: This makes it harder to see if the service that supports this relationship might be relevant elsewhere and I'll have to do the analysis again next time I work with the class. I understand that the service corresponds to MusicCentre's method called startMediaAt. What does he mean by "elsewhere"? The complete excerpt is here: http://www.mockobjects.com/2007/04/test-smell-mocking-concrete-classes.html

  Read the article

• Is the difference between BDD and TDD nothing more than a vocabulary shift?

  - by Desolate Planet

  Hello, I recently made a start on learning BDD (Behaviour Driven Development) after watching a Google tech talk presented by David Astels. He made a very interesting case for using BDD and some of the literature I've read seem to highlight that it's easier to sell BDD to management. Admittedly, I'm a little skeptical about BDD after watching the above video. So, I'm interested to understand if BDD is indeed nothing more than a change in vocabulary or if it offers other benefits.

  Read the article

• Can not update Natty running from a USB stick

  - by Ingo Gerth

  In a blogpost Jono explained a nice way to test the latest version of Natty. Under point four he proposes: Step 4: Update Although you installed the latest daily you should ensure it is up to date, and you can do this with: sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get upgrade Now, I followed all the steps and am actually writing this question from a session running on a 4GB USB stick. When trying to update the installation though (I just tried to do that using the Update Manager), it always fails because I do not have enough disc space remaining. How can I get Ubuntu to update properly on my USB stick?

  Read the article

• Inheritance vs containment while extending a large legacy project

  - by Flot2011

  I have got a legacy Java project with a lot of code. The code uses MVC pattern and is well structured and well written. It also has a lot of unit tests and it is still actively maintained (bug fixing, minor features adding). Therefore I want to preserve the original structure and code style as much as possible. The new feature I am going to add is a conceptual one, so I have to make my changes all over the code. In order to minimize changes I decided not to extend existing classes but to use containment: class ExistingClass { // .... existing code // my code adding new functionality private ExistingClassExtension extension = new ExistingClassExtension(); public ExistingClassExtension getExtension() {return extension;} } ... // somewhere in code ExistingClass instance = new ExistingClass(); ... // when I need a new functionality instance.getExtension().newMethod1(); All functionality that I am adding is inside a new ExistingClassExtension class. Actually I am adding only these 2 lines to each class that needs to be extended. By doing so I also do not need to instantiate new, extended classes all over the code and I may use existing tests to make sure there is no regression. However my colleagues argue that in this situation doing so isn't a proper OOP approach, and I need to inherit from ExistingClass in order to add a new functionality. What do you think? I am aware of numerous inheritance/containment questions here, but I think my question is different.

  Read the article

• Why is this by passing the SUDO password?

  - by John Isaacks

  I have a bash script I am using to automate a SVN checkout. The contents of the file were: #!/bin/bash cd /var/www-cake sudo svn checkout file:///usr/local/svn/bash_repo/repo/ Then when I double click the file it would ask me what to do, I would click the button "Run In Terminal" and then a terminal would pop up and ask me for the SUDO password. I would enter it, the script would execute and the terminal would close. I wanted to give some sort of indication that the script ran successfully so I edited my file to look like: #!/bin/bash cd /var/www-cake sudo svn checkout file:///usr/local/svn/bash_repo/repo/ echo "Head revision has been pushed to live server" I expected the terminal to now stay open and tell me the message afterwards. To my surprise it now opens and immediately closes. The script does execute and I no longer have to put in the SUDO password. Is this right? I do not understand why this is happening, seems like a security issue.

  Read the article

• What is an acceptable level of FPS in browser workslow editor?

  - by Theo Walcott

  I'm developing a diagraming tool and need some metrics to test it against. Unfortunately I couldn't find information regarding an average acceptable FPS level for this kind of web apps. We all know such levels for action games (which is 60fps minimum), 25fps for videostreaming. Can anyone give me some information reagarding minimal FPS level for drawing web apps? What tools would you recomend to test my app?

  Read the article

• Should tests be in the same Ruby file or in separated Ruby files?

  - by Junior Mayhé

  While using Selenium and Ruby to do some functional tests, I am worried with the performance. So is it better to add all test methods in the same Ruby file, or I should put each one in separated code files? Below a sample with all tests in the same file: # encoding: utf-8 require "selenium-webdriver" require "test/unit" class Tests < Test::Unit::TestCase def setup @driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for :firefox @base_url = "http://mysite" @driver.manage.timeouts.implicit_wait = 30 @verification_errors = [] @wait = Selenium::WebDriver::Wait.new :timeout => 10 end def teardown @driver.quit assert_equal [], @verification_errors end def element_present?(how, what) @driver.find_element(how, what) true rescue Selenium::WebDriver::Error::NoSuchElementError false end def verify(&blk) yield rescue Test::Unit::AssertionFailedError => ex @verification_errors << ex end def test_1 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_2 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_3 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_4 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_5 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end end

  Read the article

• What to do when TDD tests reveal new functionality that is needed that also needs tests?

  - by Joshua Harris

  What do you do when you are writing a test and you get to the point where you need to make the test pass and you realize that you need an additional piece of functionality that should be separated into its own function? That new function needs to be tested as well, but the TDD cycle says to Make a test fail, make it pass then refactor. If I am on the step where I am trying to make my test pass I'm not supposed to go off and start another failing test to test the new functionality that I need to implement. For example, I am writing a point class that has a function WillCollideWith(LineSegment): public class Point { // Point data and constructor ... public bool CollidesWithLine(LineSegment lineSegment) { Vector PointEndOfMovement = new Vector(Position.X + Velocity.X, Position.Y + Velocity.Y); LineSegment pointPath = new LineSegment(Position, PointEndOfMovement); if (lineSegment.Intersects(pointPath)) return true; return false; } } I was writing a test for CollidesWithLine when I realized that I would need a LineSegment.Intersects(LineSegment) function. But, should I just stop what I am doing on my test cycle to go create this new functionality? That seems to break the "Red, Green, Refactor" principle. Should I just write the code that detects that lineSegments Intersect inside of the CollidesWithLine function and refactor it after it is working? That would work in this case since I can access the data from LineSegment, but what about in cases where that kind of data is private?

  Read the article

• How can I refresh/reinstall/clear/set-to-default my bootup process?

  - by Tchalvak

  I'm currently having a problem with my bootup process that is growing progressively worse as time goes on: While booting, it does a few minutes of hard-drive reading. During that, instead of showing a boot splash screen, it shows various dashes and dots, as if the video card isn't recognizing. The splash screen actually has colors similar to the splash screen (purple), it simply is garbled. It then does a few minutes of hard-drive reads, and if I leave it long enough, sometimes it boots into the desktop (and auto-logs-in). Sometimes, unfortunately, it just hangs on that garbled screen and reads from the hard-drive forever. Notably, I've also stopped being able to access grub during bootup (perhaps it is just not displayed correctly by the video, hard to tell). This is a symptom that has grown over the course of various ubuntu upgrades, at least I suspect that the upgrade process is leaving behind cruft. So, is there a safe way for me to "refresh" the boot system so that it is clean, new, fast, and reliable? For example, to test out a cleanly configured boot, make sure that it works (try before I buy), and then apply it to the system to eliminate as much of this problem as possible? Edit: Here is the requested bootchart: http://imgur.com/9jocF

  Read the article

• Opensource package for securly allowing users to log in and provide information

  - by JTS

  I have a site written in mostly php and html. I also have a sql database of personal information like names and addresses. I would like my users to be able to log in to my website with a login I can email or snail mail to them, and view and edit their information on my database. Users can currently enter information online I and store it in my database but they can't view or edit stored information. I can add the code to do this, but when I give users the ability to view information I suddenly have a lot more security concerns. Is there an open source package to deal with allowing users to do something like this? Or is there an established convention for this? I know this is a pretty basic question, and there might be some good literature about it that I have yet to find, so if someone can just point me in the direction of some of that information, or better yet give me firsthand some information about this that would be great.

  Read the article

• Are unit tests really used as documentation?

  - by stijn

  I cannot count the number of times I read statements in the vein of 'unit tests are a very important source of documentation of the code under test'. I do not deny they are true. But personally I haven't found myself using them as documentation, ever. For the typical frameworks I use, the method declarations document their behaviour and that's all I need. And I assume the unit tests backup everything stated in that documentation, plus likely some more internal stuff, so on one side it duplicates the ducumentation while on the other it might add some more that is irrelevant. So the question is: when are unit tests used as documentation? When the comments do not cover everything? By developpers extending the source? And what do they expose that can be useful and relevant that the documentation itself cannot expose?

  Read the article

• What is the value to checking in broken unit tests?

  - by Adam W.

  While there are ways of keeping unit tests from being executed, what is the value of checking in broken unit tests? I will use a simple example. Case sensitivity. The current code is Case Sensitive. A valid input into the method is "Cat" and it would return an enum of Animal.Cat. However, the desired functionality of the method should not be case sensitive. So if the method described was passed "cat" it could possibly return something like Animal.Null instead of Animal.Cat and the unit test would fail. Though a simple code change would make this work, a more complex issue may take weeks to fix, but identifying the bug with a unit test could be a less complex task. The application currently being analyzed has 4 years of code that "works". However, recent discussions regarding unit tests has found flaws in the code. Some just need explicit implementation documentation (ex. case sensitive or not), or code that does not execute the bug based on how it is currently called. But unit tests can be created executing specific scenarios that will cause the bug to be seen and are valid inputs. What is the value of checking in unit tests that exercise the bug until someone can get around to fixing the code? Should this unit test be flagged with ignore, priority, category etc, to determine whether a build was successful based on tests executed? Eventually the unit test should be created to execute the code once someone fixes it. On one hand it shows that identified bugs have not been fixed. On the other, there could be hundreds of failed unit tests showing up in the logs and weeding through the ones that should fail vs. failures due to a code check-in would be difficult to find.

  Read the article

• Test driven development - convince me!

  - by Casebash

  I know some people are massive proponents of test driven development. I have used unit tests in the past, but only to test operations that can be tested easily or which I believe will quite possibly be correct. Complete or near complete code coverage sounds like it would take a lot of time. What projects do you use test-driven development for? Do you only use it for projects above a certain size? Should I be using it or not? Convince me!

  Read the article

• NUnit SetUp and TearDown

  - by Lijo

  I have some experience in MS Test but new to NUnit. Whether NUnit [Setup] is corresponding to [ClassInitialize] or [TestInitialize] in MS Test? What is the NUnit attribute corresponding to [TestInitialize]? REFERENCE: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1873191/testinitialize-gets-fired-for-every-test-in-my-visual-studio-unit-tests http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4602288/nunit-testcontext-currentcontext-test-not-working

  Read the article

• Service to test app on all the iPhones?

  - by David

  I have some developers creating an iPhone app, often the app will not work on one type of iPhone even though it worked on another one using the same version of iOS. Therefore, I am looking for a service where I can test the app natively on all the iPhone versions running various versions of iOS. I would like to be able to interact with the iPhones myself, so that I know that a specific bug has actually been fixed before, pushing to App Store and waiting 9 days for the review before I can hear the sad news from customers. Googling got me nowhere. Do such services exist?

  Read the article

• Automated tests for differencing algorithm

  - by Matthew Rodatus

  We are designing a differencing algorithm (based on Longest Common Subsequence) that compares a source text and a modified copy to extract the new content (i.e. content that is only in the modified copy). I'm currently compiling a library of test case data. We need to be able to run automated tests that verify the test cases, but we don't want to verify strict accuracy. Given the heuristic nature of our algorithm, we need our test pass/failures to be fuzzy. We want to specify a threshold of overlap between the desired result and the actual result (i.e. the content that is extracted). I have a few sketches in my mind as to how to solve this, but has anyone done this before? Does anyone have guidance or ideas about how to do this effectively?

  Read the article

• Quality Assurance tools discrepancies

  - by Roudak

  It is a bit ironic, yesterday I answered a question related to this topic that was marked to be good and today I'm the one who asks. These are my thoughts and a question: Also let's agree on the terms: QA is a set of activities that defines and implements processes during SW development. The common tool is the process audit. However, my colleague at work agrees with the opinion that reviews and inspections are also quality assurance tools, although most sources classify them as quality control. I would say both sides are partially right: during inspections, we evaluate a physical product (clearly QC) but we see it as a white box so we can check its compliance with set processes (QA). Do you think it is the reason of the dichotomy among the authors? I know it is more like an academic question but it deserves the answer :)

  Read the article

• Sounds Good...

  - by andyleonard

  Introduction This post is the twenty-ninth part of a ramble-rant about the software business. The current posts in this series are: Goodwill, Negative and Positive Visions, Quests, Missions Right, Wrong, and Style Follow Me Balance, Part 1 Balance, Part 2 Definition of a Great Team The 15-Minute Meeting Metaproblems: Drama The Right Question Software is Organic, Part 1 Metaproblem: Terror I Don't Work On My Car A Turning Point Human Doings Everything Changes Getting It Right The First Time One-Time...(read more)

  Read the article

• Where should I store and verify files manipulated by an app

  - by Alan W. Smith

  I'm working on a little Ruby script to move screenshots while renaming them based on a specific convention. I'll be writing tests to confirm the behavior. Ruby has lots of conventions for where to store files (e.g. the "spec" and "features" directories for RSpec and Cucumber, respectively), but I'm not finding best practices for storing files that will be acted upon by the tests. The same goes for a destination for the final copies of the files. So, the question in two parts is: Where should I store files that the test cases will use for a source input. Where should tests that need to write output files send them to.

  Read the article

• Is there any good reason I would want my website to be framed?

  - by minitech

  I'm building a website that's not security-critical in any way at all, so having somebody put a page in an <iframe> is not particularly dangerous to its users. However, as my website doesn't have script plugins that will be used anywhere else, is there any reason why I shouldn't just apply: X-Frame-Options: Deny to every page on my website? Is there any valid reason for any other website to embed mine? I've seen plenty of content-stealing ones and attempts to hijack user accounts, but never an actual good usage of frames that's not an explicit feature of the website.

  Read the article

• Are there any formal approaches for familiarising oneself with a new or legacy codebase? [closed]

  - by codecowboy

  Possible Duplicate: How do you dive into large code bases? As a contractor, I often encounter legacy codebases which might have little or no supporting documentation. Are there any techniques or best practices? I work with PHP and web applications, though also face situations in which I have to edit code in an unfamiliar language. How can I leave a codebase in better shape, learn something along the way and impress the team I'm working with?

  Read the article

• Is deserializing complex objects instead of creating them a good idea, in test setup?

  - by Chris Bye

  I'm writing tests for a component that takes very complex objects as input. These tests are mixes of tests against already existing components, and test-first tests for new features. Instead of re-creating my input objects (this would be a large chunk of code) or reading one from our data store, I had the thought to serialize a live instance of one of these objects, and just deserialize it into test setup. I can't decide if this is a reasonable idea that will save effort in long run, or whether it's the worst idea that I've ever had, causing those that will maintain this code will hunt me down as soon as they read it. Is deserialization of inputs a valid means of test setup in some cases? To give a sense of scale of what I'm dealing with, the size of serialization output for one of these input objects is 93KB. Obtained by, in C#: new BinaryFormatter().Serialize((Stream)fileStream, myObject);

  Read the article

• Should I make a seperate unit test for a method, if it only modifies the parent state?

  - by Dante

  Should classes, that modify the state of the parent class, but not itself, be unit tested separately? And by separately, I mean putting the test in the corresponding unit test class, that tests that specific class. I'm developing a library based on chained methods, that return a new instance of a new type in most cases, where a chained method is called. The returned instances only modify the root parent state, but not itself. Overly simplified example, to get the point across: public class BoxedRabbits { private readonly Box _box; public BoxedRabbits(Box box) { _box = box; } public void SetCount(int count) { _box.Items += count; } } public class Box { public int Items { get; set; } public BoxedRabbits AddRabbits() { return new BoxedRabbits(this); } } var box = new Box(); box.AddRabbits().SetCount(14); Say, if I write a unit test under the Box class unit tests: box.AddRabbits().SetCount(14) I could effectively say, that I've already tested the BoxedRabbits class as well. Is this the wrong way of approaching this, even though it's far simpler to first write a test for the above call, then to first write a unit test for the BoxedRabbits separately?

  Read the article

• How to get rid of crawling errors due to the URL Encoded Slashes (%2F) problem in Apache

  - by user14198

  The Google web crawler has indexed a whole set of URLs with encoded slashes (%2F) for our site. I assume it has picked up the pages from our XML sitemap file. The problem is that the live pages will actually result in a failure because of the Url Encoded Slashes Problem in Apache. Some solutions are mentioned here We are implementing a 301 redirect scheme for all the error pages. This should make the Google bot delete the pages from the crawling errors (no more crashing pages). Does implementing the 301s require the pages to be "live"? In that case we may be forced to implement solution 1 in the article. The problem is that solution 1 will pose a security vulnerability..

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121  | Next Page >