Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Trident" data-source="post: 1084163" data-attributes="member: 99014">Everyone can test the way they want to test. If someone wants to test a product tweaked, then so be it. There are no rules set in stone how testers should act.I just have the following recommendations:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Always make sure that all protection components are tested and not just one. If a component is not tested, then explain why, for example “I am not testing LiveGuard as it covers files up to X MB and I can easily fill a string with garbage to exceed this size”.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">When using variety of malware that may evade detection, make it clear to what extent this malware affects home users.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">When performing tests with a single sample, always aim to provide recommendations on how users can protect their systems so something useful can be drawn out of the test and it doesn’t look like plain product bashing/promoting.</li>
</ul></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Trident, post: 1084163, member: 99014"] Everyone can test the way they want to test. If someone wants to test a product tweaked, then so be it. There are no rules set in stone how testers should act. I just have the following recommendations: [LIST] [*]Always make sure that all protection components are tested and not just one. If a component is not tested, then explain why, for example “I am not testing LiveGuard as it covers files up to X MB and I can easily fill a string with garbage to exceed this size”. [*]When using variety of malware that may evade detection, make it clear to what extent this malware affects home users. [*]When performing tests with a single sample, always aim to provide recommendations on how users can protect their systems so something useful can be drawn out of the test and it doesn’t look like plain product bashing/promoting. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]

Verification