Test Evidence vs. Test Activity: What Auditors Actually Want From Your Automation

As software development becomes more automated, organizations are generating more testing data than ever. For security, governance, and compliance teams, that volume is not the real problem. The problem is proving what the tests actually mean.

An automated test can show that a control worked under a specific set of conditions. On its own, it rarely shows why the test exists, which requirement it maps to, who approved it, whether it still matters as the application changes, or how failures and exceptions are handled.

That gap between test activity and meaningful test evidence matters more as compliance requirements grow more complex and development environments grow more automated.

In this article, James Carpenter, VP of Product at Leapwork, looks at what auditors actually want from automated testing, and why organizations need to treat the evidence trail around their tests as seriously as the tests themselves.

Test Evidence vs. Test Activity:...

Copyright of this story solely belongs to cloudtweaks.com. To see the full text click HERE