【第06套-83】小李去参加单位组织的信息安全培训后，他把自己对管理信息管理体系 ISMS的理解画了一张图，但是他还存在一个空白处未填写，请帮他选择一个合适的选项（）

【第06套-84】Windows系统下，可通过运行（）命令打开Windows管理控制台｡

【第06套-85】下图是某单位对其主网站一天流量的监测图，如果该网站当天17：00到20：00之间受到攻击，则从图中数据分析，这种攻击可能属于下面什么攻击｡

【第06套-86】在window系统中用于显示本机各网络端口详细情况的命令是：

【第06套-88】如下图所示，Alice用Bob的密钥加密明文，将密文发送给Bob，Bob再用自己的私钥解密，恢复出明文以下说法正确的是：

【第06套-89】以下哪种公钥密码算法既可以用于数据加密又可以用于密钥交换?

【第06套-90】在密码学的Kerchhof假设中，密码系统的安全性仅依赖于：

【第06套-91】在Windows XP 中用事件查看器查看日志文件，可看到的日志包括?

【第06套-92】操作系统安全的基础是建立在：

【第06套-93】某用户通过账号，密码和验证码成功登录某银行的个人网银系统，此过程属于以下哪一类：

【第06套-94】Windows文件系统权限管理作用访问控制列表（AccessControl List，ACL）机制，以下哪个说法是错误的：

【第06套-95】下列关于Kerckhof准则的说法正确的是：

【第06套-96】小李是某公司系统规划师，某天他针对公司信息系统的现状，绘制了一张系统安全建设规划图，如下图所示｡ 请问这个图形是依据下面哪个模型来绘制的（）

【第06套-97】信息发送者使用（）进行数字签名｡

【第06套-99】以下列出了MAC和散列函数的相似性，哪一项说法是错误的?

【第06套-100】下面哪种方法产生的密码是最难记忆的?

【第07套-01】金女士经常通过计算机网络购物，从安全角度看，下面哪项是不好的操作习惯（）?

【第07套-02】小王在学习信息安全管理体系相关知识之后，对于建立信息安全管理体系，自己总结了下面四条要求，其中理解不正确的是（）

【第07套-04】密码学是网络安全的基础，但网络安全不能单纯依靠安全的密码算法，密码协议也是网络安全的一个重要组成部分｡ 下面描述中，错误的是（）

【第07套-05】某网络安全公司基于网络的实时入侵检测技术，动态监测来自于外部网络和内部网络的所有访问行为，当检测到来自内外网络针对或通过防火墙的攻击行为，会及时响应，并通知防火墙实时阻断攻击源，从而进一步提高了传统的抗击能力，更有效地保护了网络资源，提高了防御体系级别｡ 但入侵检测技术不能实现以下哪种功能：

【第07套-06】若一个组织声称自己的ISMS符合ISO/IEC27001或GB/T22080标准要求，其信息安全控制措施通常在以下方面实施常规控制，不包括哪一项（）

【第07套-07】随着信息安全涉及的范围越来越广，各个组织对信息安全管理的需求越来越迫切，越来越多的组织开始尝试使用，参考ISO27001介绍的ISMS来实施信息安全管理体系，提高组织的信息安全管理能力，关于ISMS，下面描述错误的是：

【第07套-08】王工是某单位的系统管理员，他在某次参加了单位组织的风险管理工作时，发现当前案例中共有两个重要资产：资产A1和资产A2：其中资产A1面临两个主要威胁：威胁T1和威胁T2；而资产A2面临一个主要威胁：威胁T3；威胁T1可以利用的资产A1存在的两个脆弱性：脆弱性V1和脆弱性V2；威胁T2可以利用的资产A1存在的三个脆弱性，脆弱性V3､ 脆弱性V4和脆弱性V5；威胁T3可以利用的资产A2存在的两个脆弱性：脆弱性V6和脆弱性V7根据上述条件，请问：使用相乘法时，应该为资产A1计算几个风险值（）

【第07套-09】在信息安全管理过程中，背景建立是实施工作的第一步｡ 下面哪项理解是错误的（）

【第07套-10】ISO9001-2000标准在制定､ 实施质量管理体系以及改进其有效性时采用过程方法，通过满足顾客要求增进顾客满意｡ 下图是关于过程方法的示意图，图中括号空白处应填写（）

【第07套-11】Apache HTTP Server（简称Apache）是一个开放源码的Web服务运行平台，在使用过程中，该软件默认会将自己的软件名和版本号发送给客户端｡ 从安全角度出发，为隐藏这些信息，应当采取以下哪种措施（）

【第07套-13】某购物网站开发项目经过需求分析进入系统设计阶段，为了保证用户账户的安全，项目开发人员决定用户登录时除了用户名口令认证方式外，还加入基于数字证书的身份认证功能，同时用户口令使用SHA-1算法加密后存放在后台数据库中，请问以上安全设计遵循的是哪项安全设计原则：

【第07套-14】防火墙是网络信息系统建设中常常采用的一类产品，它在内外网隔离方面的作用是：

【第07套-16】分组密码算法是一类十分重要的密码算法，下面描述中，错误的是（）

【第07套-18】某单位在一次信息安全风险管理活动中，风险评估报告提出服务器A的FTP服务存在高风险漏洞｡ 随后该单位在风险处理时选择了关闭FTP服务的处理措施｡ 请问该措施属于哪种风险处理方式（）

【第07套-21】恢复时间目标（Recovery Time Objective，RTO）和恢复点目标（RECOVERY Point Objective，RPO）是业务连续性和灾难恢复工作中的两个重要指标，随着信息系统越来越重要和信息技术越来越先进，这两个指标的数值越来越小｡ 小华准备为其工作的信息系统拟定RTO和RPO指标，则以下描述中，正确的是（）

【第07套-22】小李在检查公司对外服务网站的源代码时，发现程序在发生诸如没有找到资源，数据库连接错误，写临时文件错误等问题时，会将详细的错误原因在结果页面上显示出来，从安全角度考虑，小李决定修改代码，将详细的错误原因都隐藏起来，在页面上仅仅告知用户“抱歉，发生内部错误”请问这种处理方法的主要目的是：

【第07套-23】关于信息安全应急响应管理过程描述不正确的是（）

【第07套-24】分布式拒绝服务（DDoS）攻击指借助于客户/服务器技术，将多个计算机联合起来作为攻击平台，对一个或多个目标发动DDoS攻击，从而成倍地提高拒绝服务攻击的威力，一般来说，DDoS攻击的主要目的是破坏目标系统的（）：

【第07套-25】小王是某大学计算科学与技术专业的毕业生，大四上学期开始找工作，期望谋求一份技术管理的职位，一次面试中，某公司的技术经理让小王谈一谈信息安全风险管理中的“背景建立”的基本概念与认识，小王的主要观点包括：（1）背景建立的目的是为了明确信息安全风险管理的范围和对象，以及对象的特性和安全要求，完成信息安全风验管理项目的规划和准备；（2）背景建立根据组织机构相关的行业经验执行，雄厚的经验有助于达到事半功倍的效果；（3）背景建立包括：风险管理准备､ 信息系统调查､ 信息系统分析和信息安全分析；（4）背景建立的阶段性成果包括：风险管理计划书，信息系统的描述报告，信息系统的分析报告，信息系统的安全要求报告｡ 请问小王的所述论点中错误的是哪项：

【第07套-27】在信息系统中，访问控制是重要的安全功能之一｡ 他的任务是在用户对系统资源提供最大限度共享的基础上，对用户的访问权限进行管理，防止对信息的非授权篡改和滥用｡ 访问控制模型将实体划分为主体和客体两类，通过对主体身份的识别来限制其对客体的访问权限｡ 下列选项中，对主体､ 客体和访问权限的描述中错误的是（）

【第07套-28】超文本传输协议（HyperText Transfer Protocol，HTTP）是互联网上广泛使用的一种网络协议，下面哪种协议基于HTTP并结合SSL协议，具备用户鉴别和通信数据加密等功能（）

【第07套-29】国家科学技术秘密的密级分为绝密级､ 机密级､ 秘密级，以下哪项属于绝密级的描述?

【第07套-31】关于ARP欺骗原理和防范措施，下面理解错误的是（）

【第07套-32】我国标准《信息安全风险管理指南》（GB/Z24364）给出了信息安全风险管理的内容和过程，可以用下图来表示｡ 图中空白处应该填写（）

在客观规律面前，人的主观能动性表现在___

事物的联系和运动之间的关系___

唯物辩证法的总特征是___

___

“割下来的手就不再是人手”这句话体现了___

唯物辩证法认为发展的实质是___

区分新事物和旧事物的标志在于看它们___

质量互变规律揭示了___

质和事物的存在是___

在实际工作中，要注意掌握分寸，防止“过”或“不及”，其关键在于___

区分量变和质变的根本标志是看___

量变的复杂性是指___

量变中的阶段性部分质变表现了___

量变中的局部性部分质变是___

揭示事物发展的趋势和道路的规律是___

“肯定和否定相互渗透，在一定意义上，肯定就是否定。”这是一种___

事物的否定方面是指___

作为辩证的否定的“扬弃”是___

辩证的否定是事物发展的环节,因为辩证的否定___

否定之否定规律___

事物发展的周期性体现了___

直线论的错误在于只看到___

循环论的错误在于___

对立统一规律揭示了___

唯物辩证法的实质和核心是___

辩证法所说的矛盾是指___

矛盾的基本属性是___

依据是___

矛盾问题的精髓是___

题的方法都是___

“任何个别（无论怎样）都是一般”。这句话的正确含义是___

在唯物辩证法看来，水果同苹果、梨、香蕉、桔子等的关系是___

“是就是是，不是就是不是，除此之外都是鬼话。”这是一种___

真象和假象的区别在于___

有的哲学家说，在大风扬起的尘土中，每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___

“或然率”是指___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___