English | EN 
There is an old saying: “You reap what you sow.” But what if the seeds you sow are bugs? And what if you do not always want to reap them? This is the fundamental contradiction of bug seeding – a technique that continues to spark both curiosity and controversy in the world of Software Quality Assurance.
Having grown up on a farm, I have seen first-hand the importance of seeds. You do not just plant anything – you reserve the best seeds from one season to prepare for the next. These seeds are carefully selected, preserved, and treated with care. There is a strategy behind it. You plant with intention, understanding the soil, the seasons, and the yield you aim for. In many ways, bug seeding in software quality and testing follows a similar logic.
Bug seeding, also known as defect seeding, is the intentional insertion of known defects into software code or documentation to assess the effectiveness of testing and coverage. The concept is simple: plant a few known bugs and observe how many are caught by testers, code reviewers, verification and validation processes, or automated tools. If you seed 10 bugs and only 6 are found, test effectiveness may be estimated at 60%. It is not a perfect metric, but it offers insights that are otherwise hard to obtain.
“No system can ever be fully tested or entirely free of defects.”
Anyone working in software testing understands this truth: no amount of testing can guarantee a bug-free product. Bugs are often discovered late in the development cycle – or worse, after deployment. Some may be minor annoyances; others can result in significant costs, reputational damage, or even legal consequences.
Despite our best efforts, robust regression packs, well-written test cases, and automated test suites, bugs can still be missed. Applications are, by nature, complex systems. Their behaviour can change depending on the environment, data, user interactions, and countless other variables. At some point, our tests may become so familiar with the software that they develop a kind of “immunity” – they stop “seeing” bugs. This is where bug seeding comes in – not as a punitive tool, but as a diagnostic method to assess the strength of our testing.
Bug seeding is not new. It is an old-school technique, but it remains relevant – particularly in environments where safety, compliance, or high reliability is critical. The practice helps evaluate several key aspects:
- Test Coverage – Are we really testing all critical areas?
- Defect Detection Efficiency – How effective are our testers at identifying issues?
- Tester Skill and Focus – Are the right people working in the right areas?
The objective should always be learning and improvement – never blame. The aim is not to catch someone out for missing a seeded bug; it’s to uncover blind spots and strengthen the process.
Of course, bug seeding has its limitations. Like any technique, it must be applied judiciously. If overused or misunderstood, it can lead to distrust between teams or skewed metrics that don’t reflect real-world effectiveness. Artificial bugs may not always behave like real ones, especially in integrated systems. The process also requires careful planning: the bugs need to be realistic, representative of actual defect types, and easily traceable so they can be removed after the assessment.
When projects and product development are running behind schedule, or when testing time is tight, few are willing to adopt this technique – as it’s often perceived as a “speed breaker”.
But there’s a deeper lesson here – just like in farming, you don’t plant seeds merely to harvest them mindlessly. You plant with care, monitor, adjust, and aim to grow something better each season. In software, we should seed with the intent to refine our testing processes – not simply to catch people out.
So let’s bring back thoughtful bug seeding – not as a trick, but as a tool. Let’s use it to build stronger teams, sharper testers, and more resilient software.
Yes, you reap what you sow – but in testing, perhaps we should say:
“You seed so you know how to reap better next time.”