Dynamic Testing: Unit u0026 Integration Test Design for Security Flaws Quiz

This quiz evaluates your understanding of dynamic analysis in software testing, focusing on writing unit and integration tests with mocking, coverage analysis, and runtime checks to detect injection vulnerabilities and authentication bugs. Test your knowledge of key testing concepts and best practices in securing applications through test design.

1. Purpose of Unit Tests in Security Testing

   What is one primary purpose of creating unit tests when aiming to catch injection vulnerabilities in individual functions?

   1. To validate the function with various input values, including malicious payloads
   2. To measure hardware resource usage during execution
   3. To check the spelling of function names
   4. To manually review coded logic step by step

   Explanation: Unit tests are valuable for testing functions with a range of inputs, including edge cases and potentially malicious strings, to detect injection issues early. Measuring hardware resources is not focused on injection vulnerability. Manual review is separate from automated unit testing. Checking function name spelling is unrelated to injection risks.

2. Role of Mocking in Tests

   Why is mocking often used in integration tests to help uncover authentication bugs?

   1. It allows the replacement of real authentication dependencies with controlled fakes
   2. It randomizes test results every run
   3. It provides real-time monitoring of hardware sensors
   4. It compiles code faster for production use

   Explanation: Mocking enables testers to substitute external components, like authentication systems, with controllable replicas to simulate various scenarios such as failed or successful logins. Monitoring sensors and compiling speed are unrelated to test logic. Randomizing test results would not aid in consistently detecting authentication bugs.

3. Test Coverage Definition

   In the context of dynamic testing, what does 'test coverage' most accurately measure?

   1. The visual layout of test reports
   2. The percentage of code executed by tests
   3. The number of users using the application
   4. The frequency of security patches

   Explanation: Test coverage refers to how much code is actually run during testing, which helps identify untested paths that may hide security bugs. The number of users and the frequency of patches do not relate to code coverage. The visual layout of test reports does not indicate code coverage.

4. Catch Injection Bugs with Input Variation

   How can dynamic runtime tests be designed to expose code vulnerable to injection attacks, such as SQL or command injection?

   1. By altering the operating system configuration mid-test
   2. By running only default input values
   3. By disabling error reporting in production
   4. By providing inputs containing injection payloads and checking for unexpected behavior

   Explanation: Supplying malicious or unusual inputs and monitoring for failures or security breaches helps detect vulnerabilities such as SQL injection. Relying on default inputs can miss such bugs, disabling error reports reduces visibility, and altering operating systems is not generally a test strategy for this issue.

5. Authentication Bug Detection

   Which of the following is a simple way to design a test to catch missing authentication checks in a web handler function?

   1. Only test the handler with valid authentication tokens
   2. Skip testing protected endpoints
   3. Rely solely on static code analysis
   4. Call the handler with no user authentication and review the response for unintended access

   Explanation: Attempting to access protected functionality without authentication and observing the outcome reveals failures in authentication enforcement. Testing only valid cases or skipping protected endpoints misses the issue. Static code analysis alone may miss subtle runtime authentication omissions.

6. Importance of Assertions

   Why are assertions important in dynamic tests aimed at finding security issues?

   1. They confirm that sensitive operations only occur under expected conditions
   2. They limit the number of test runs
   3. They replace all runtime error checks
   4. They automatically optimize code performance

   Explanation: Assertions verify that certain conditions are met, preventing accidental security lapses during runs. While helpful, they are not a replacement for error handling. They do not optimize performance or reduce test frequency.

7. Integration Test Scope

   Which scenario best fits the goal of integration testing with respect to catching authentication-related bugs?

   1. Mocking unrelated third-party APIs
   2. Measuring code documentation quality
   3. Only running isolated single-function tests
   4. Testing interaction between multiple application components with various user states

   Explanation: Integration tests examine how multiple modules work together, often uncovering complex authentication issues through simulated user scenarios. Isolated tests do not cover integrations. Documentation and unrelated API mocks do not specifically focus on authentication logic.

8. Mock Data for Injection Testing

   When testing for injection flaws, why is it beneficial to use mock data sources instead of real databases?

   1. It replaces all application logic temporarily
   2. It disables input validation in the application
   3. It automatically speeds up production applications
   4. It allows repeatable tests without risk to real data or systems

   Explanation: Mock sources enable safe, reproducible testing of malicious inputs without harming real systems or data. Speeding up production is unrelated, disabling input checks is risky, and replacing all logic is not the purpose of mocking.

9. Runtime Security Checks

   Which technique can help detect if unauthorized access is gained at runtime during integration tests?

   1. Run tests only in development environments
   2. Rely on comments in code for access control documentation
   3. Insert runtime security assertions that check access rights before sensitive operations
   4. Omit all input validation steps

   Explanation: By inserting assertions, you ensure that permissions are actively enforced during actual runs, exposing access control lapses. Skipping validation, relying on comments, or test environment selection does not confirm correct authorization logic is executed.

10. Tracking Code Paths

    What does code coverage analysis help you discover when designing security-focused tests?

    1. Portions of code not exercised by your current set of tests
    2. Unused files in the project directory
    3. Incorrect color themes in user interfaces
    4. Network bandwidth usage patterns

    Explanation: Coverage analysis highlights which parts of your code are untested, helping identify security-critical paths you may have missed. UI colors, project files, and bandwidth stats are not related to test coverage outcomes.

11. Testing for Parameter Tampering

    How can a dynamic test for parameter tampering in a URL best be designed?

    1. Only send requests with valid and expected parameters
    2. Send requests with modified parameters and check if unauthorized data is accessible
    3. Disable input logging for all requests
    4. Obfuscate error messages without testing functionality

    Explanation: Testing with altered or forged parameters may reveal if unauthorized access is possible, exposing weaknesses like broken access control. Only using valid parameters, disabling logging, or hiding errors would not help in catching such bugs.

12. Authentication Mocking Purpose

    During integration tests, what is an advantage of mocking authentication services?

    1. Tests can simulate various user roles and failures swiftly without real credentials
    2. It automatically fixes authorization errors in the codebase
    3. It disables unnecessary runtime checks entirely
    4. It encrypts all test traffic by default

    Explanation: Mocking allows rapid, flexible simulation of user types and edge case failures, crucial for testing access control logic. It does not fix bugs automatically or encrypt traffic, nor should it turn off important checks.

13. Function Under Test Concept

    What does the term 'function under test' refer to in unit testing for security flaws?

    1. A sample output shown in a test summary
    2. The specific piece of code being validated by the test
    3. A variable naming convention in source files
    4. A method that only logs error messages

    Explanation: The function under test is the focused unit whose behavior and outputs are being assessed under different inputs. Sample outputs, variable names, or logging methods are not equivalent to the target of a unit test.

14. Handling Unexpected Inputs

    Why should tests include unexpected, malformed, or boundary-value inputs?

    1. To avoid errors by never testing unusual scenarios
    2. To reveal how code handles edge cases and potential exploitation vectors
    3. To ensure only positive results are shown in reports
    4. To maximize test execution speed over accuracy

    Explanation: Unusual inputs can trigger hidden bugs that regular inputs would not, so testing these helps spot vulnerabilities. Favoring speed, avoiding errors by skipping edge cases, or filtering for only positive results weakens the security value of tests.

15. Authentication Check Example

    Given a handler that deletes user data, what should a test check to catch missing authentication enforcement?

    1. Whether the database is up-to-date
    2. Only the success message format after deletion
    3. Whether an unauthenticated request can trigger a data deletion
    4. How the log messages are sorted

    Explanation: The key risk is that data could be deleted without proper authentication, so testing this scenario helps catch missing access checks. Message format, database status, or logging patterns don't address the authentication enforcement.

16. Runtime Check for User Roles

    How might you use a runtime assertion in a test to verify that only administrators can change system settings?

    1. Skip all authorization error handling in the test
    2. Assert that the change operation fails or is denied for non-admin users
    3. Only test with administrator credentials
    4. Log all input values without assertions

    Explanation: By explicitly asserting failure for unauthorized roles, tests confirm proper enforcement of role-based control. Skipping error handling, mere logging, or only testing admins would all miss possible privilege escalation bugs.