New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

ISTQB ATM Exam - Topic 2 Question 64 Discussion

Actual exam question for ISTQB's ATM exam
Question #: 64
Topic #: 2
[All ATM Questions]

Assume you are the Test Manager in charge of independent testing for avionics applications. You are in charge of testing for a project to implement three different CSCI (Computer Software Configuration Item):

- a BOOT-X CSCI that must be certified at level B of the DO-178B standard

- a DIAG-X CSCI that must be certified at level C of the DO-178B standard

- a DRIV-X CSCI that must be certified at level A of the DO-178B standard

These are three different software modules written in C language to run on a specific hardware platform.

You have been asked to select a single code coverage tool to perform the mandatory code coverage measurements, in order to meet the structural coverage criteria prescribed by the DO-178B standard. This tool must be qualified as a verification tool under DO-178B.

Since there are significant budget constraints to purchase this tool, you are evaluating an opensource tool that is able to provide different types of code coverage. This tool meets perfectly your technical needs in terms of the programming language and the specific hardware platform (it supports also the specific C-compiler).

The source code of the tool is available.

Your team could easily customize the tool to meet the project needs. This tool is not qualified as a verification tool under the DO-178B.

Which of the following are the three main concerns related to that open-source tool selection?

K4 3 credits (2 credits out of 3 credits correct, 1 credit point)

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A, C, F

by Gearldine at Jan 14, 2025, 09:28 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ATM Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Davida
3 months ago
I agree, we need to ensure it supports all coverage types!
upvoted 0 times
...
Maurine
3 months ago
Licensing compatibility is a big deal for avionics firms.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shawna
3 months ago
Wait, is it really a good idea to use an unqualified tool?
upvoted 0 times
...
Sharan
4 months ago
Usability is key, but I think coverage types are more critical.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tamera
4 months ago
Definitely concerned about the qualification costs for DO-178B.
upvoted 0 times
...
Malcom
4 months ago
I feel like option F about licensing could be a big issue too, especially with confidentiality in avionics.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wilbert
4 months ago
I think we practiced a question about tool qualification costs before, so option C seems really relevant here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laurene
4 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like usability might not be as critical as the tool's qualification status. Maybe option C is more important?
upvoted 0 times
...
Geraldine
5 months ago
I remember discussing the importance of code coverage types for different DO-178B levels, so I think option A is definitely a concern.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kris
5 months ago
I'm not too worried about the general usability or installation procedure of the tool. As long as it meets the technical requirements and can be easily customized, that should be manageable.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lillian
5 months ago
The costs to qualify the tool as a verification tool under DO-178B are definitely a major concern. I'll need to research that thoroughly to understand the potential impact on the budget.
upvoted 0 times
...
Desiree
5 months ago
Okay, the first thing I need to figure out is whether the open-source tool can actually support all the required code coverage types for the different CSCI levels. That's going to be crucial.
upvoted 0 times
...
Madelyn
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused about the different levels of the DO-178B standard and how that impacts the code coverage requirements. I'll need to review that part carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nicolette
5 months ago
This looks like a tricky question, but I think I can handle it. The key is to focus on the main concerns related to the open-source tool selection.
upvoted 0 times
...
Joana
1 year ago
Totally, the code coverage support is key. Although, if the tool comes with a free 'eject seat' feature, I'd be willing to overlook a few other issues.
upvoted 0 times
Berry
11 months ago
F) Is the licensing scheme of the tool compatible with the confidentiality needs of the avionics company?
upvoted 0 times
...
Nickie
12 months ago
C) What are the costs to qualify the tool as a verification tool under the DO-178B?
upvoted 0 times
...
Alona
12 months ago
A) Does the tool support all the types of code coverage required from the three levels A, B, C of the DO-178B standard?
upvoted 0 times
...
Viva
1 year ago
C) What are the costs to qualify the tool as a verification tool under the DO-178B?
upvoted 0 times
...
Nadine
1 year ago
A) Does the tool support all the types of code coverage required from the three levels A, B, C of the DO-178B standard?
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Izetta
1 year ago
Haha, forget about the RAM requirements, I'm more worried about whether the developers remembered to include a 'launch the missiles' button on the UI. Gotta keep those avionics pilots on their toes!
upvoted 0 times
...
Jerilyn
1 year ago
I also believe that the cost to qualify the tool as a verification tool is another major concern.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lacresha
1 year ago
I agree with Shawna. It's crucial for the tool to cover all levels A, B, and C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Louisa
1 year ago
I agree, the cost to qualify the tool is a big one. And you can't forget about the confidentiality of the avionics company - the licensing scheme better be on point!
upvoted 0 times
Trinidad
1 year ago
F) Is the licensing scheme of the tool compatible with the confidentiality needs of the avionics company?
upvoted 0 times
...
Elke
1 year ago
C) What are the costs to qualify the tool as a verification tool under the DO-178B?
upvoted 0 times
...
Amie
1 year ago
A) Does the tool support all the types of code coverage required from the three levels A, B, C of the DO-178B standard?
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Raul
1 year ago
The main concerns are definitely the cost to qualify the tool and whether it supports all the required code coverage levels. The usability and installation are important, but secondary to the compliance and certification issues.
upvoted 0 times
Aleisha
1 year ago
E) Does the tool require a system with more than 4GB of RAM memory?
upvoted 0 times
...
Aide
1 year ago
C) What are the costs to qualify the tool as a verification tool under the DO-178B?
upvoted 0 times
...
Willard
1 year ago
A) Does the tool support all the types of code coverage required from the three levels A, B, C of the DO-178B standard?
upvoted 0 times
...
Elenore
1 year ago
F) Is the licensing scheme of the tool compatible with the confidentiality needs of the avionics company?
upvoted 0 times
...
Gail
1 year ago
C) What are the costs to qualify the tool as a verification tool under the DO-178B?
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristel
1 year ago
A) Does the tool support all the types of code coverage required from the three levels A, B, C of the DO-178B standard?
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Shawna
1 year ago
I think the main concern is if the tool supports all types of code coverage required by the DO-178B standard.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel