90，CC标准是目前系统安全认证方面最权威的标准,以下哪一项没有体现CC标准的先进性___

91，关于对信息安全事件进行分类分级管理的原因描述不正确的是___.

92， 《信息安全保障技术框架》(Information Assurance Technical Framework, IATF)是由___发布的。

93， ISO9001-2000标准鼓励的制定、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，增进顾客满意度。下图是关于过程方法的示意图，图中括号空白处应填写___。

94，数字签名不能实现的安全特性为___.

95，即使最好用的安全产品也存在___.结果,在任何的系统中敌手最终都能够找出一个被开发出的漏洞.一种有效的对策是在敌手和它的目标之间配备多种( ).每一种机制都应包括( )两种手段.

96，有关危害国家秘密安全的行为包括___

97，若一个组织声称自己的ISMS符合ISO/IEC 27001或GB/T22080标准要求,其信息安全控制措施通常在以下方面实瓶常规控制,不包括哪一项___

98，部署互联网协议安全虚拟专用网(Internet Protocol Security Virtual Private Network,IPsec VPN)时,以下说法正确的是___.

99，在风险管理中,残余风险是指在实施了新的或增强的安全措施后还剩下的风险,关于残余风险,下面描述错误的是___

100，若一个组织声称自已的ISMS符合ISO/IEC 27001或 GB/T22080 标准要求,其信息安全控制措施通常需要在物理和环境安全方面实施常规控制.物理和环境安全领域包括安全区域和设备安全两个控制目标.安全以区域的控制目标是防止对组织场所和信息的未授权物理访问、损坏和干扰,关键或敏感的信息及信息处理设施应放在安全区域内,并受到相应保护,该目标可以通过以下控制措施来实现,不包括哪一项___

1。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___

2。.某IT公司针对信息安全事件已经建立了完善的预案，在年度企业信息安全总结会上，信息安全管理员对今年应急预案工作做出了四个总结工作是错误，作为企业的CSO,请你指出存在问题的是哪个总结？___

3。.你是单位安全主管，由于微软刚发布了数个系统漏洞补丁，安全运维人员给出了针对此漏洞修补的四个建议方案，请选择其中一个最优先方案执行___

4。.不同的信息安全风险评估方法可能得到不同的风险评估结果，所以组织机构应当根据各自的实际情况选择适当的风险评估方法。下面的描述中错误的是___

5。.在某信息系统的设计中，用户登陆过程是这样的：（1）用户通过HTTP协议访问信息系统；（2）用户在登陆页面输入用户名和口令：（3）信息系统在服务器端检查用户名和密码的正确性，如果正确，则鉴别完成。可以看出，这个鉴别过程属于___

6。关于ARP欺骗原理和防范措施，下面理解错误的是___

7。某单位根据业务需要准备立项开发一个业务软件，对于软件开发安全投入经费研讨时开发部门和信息中心就发生了分歧，开发部门认为开发阶段无需投入，软件开发完成后发现问题后在针对性的解决，比前期安全投入要成本更低，信息中心则认为应在软件安全开发阶段投入，后期解决代价太大，双方争执不下，作为信息安全专家，请选择对软件开发安全投入的准确说法___

8。Gary MoGrow博士及其合作都提出软件安全应由三根支柱来支撑，这三个支柱是___

9。对信息安全事件的分级参考下列三个要素：信息系统的重要程度、系统损失和社会影响，依据信息系统的重要程度对信息上系统进行划分，不属于正确划分级别的是___

10。信息安全组织的管理涉及内部组织和外部各方面两个控制目标，为了实现对组织内部信息安全的有效管理，应该实施常规的控制措施，不包括哪些选项___

11。由于Internet安全问题日益突出，基于TCP／IP协议，相关组织和专家在协议的不同层次设计了相应的安全通信协议，用来保障网络各层次的安全，其中，属于或依俯于传输层的安全协议 是___

12。关于Wi-Fi联盟提出的安全协议WPA和WPA2的区别，下面描述正确的是___

13。一个密码系统至少由明文、密文、加密算法、解密算法和密钥5部分组成，而其安全性是由下列哪个选项决定的___

14。某集团公司根据业务需要，在各地分支机构部署前置机，为了保证安全，集团总部要求前置机开放日志共享，由总部服务器采集进行中集中分析，在运行过程中发现攻击者也可通过共享从前置机中提取日志，从而导致部分敏感信息泄漏，根据降低攻击面的原则，应采取以下哪项处理措施___

15。信息系统安全保障评估概念和关系如图所示，信息系统安全保障评估，就是在信息系统所处运行环境中对信息系统安全保障的具体工作和活动进行客观的评估，通过信息系统安全保障评估所搜集的___，向信息系统的所有相关方提供信息系统的（B）能够实现其安全保障策略，能够将其所面临的风险降低到其可接受的程度的主观信心，信息系统安全保障评估的评估对象是（B），信息系统不仅包含仅讨论术的信息技术系统，还包括同信息系统所处的运行环境相关的人和管理等领域，信息系统安全保障是一个动态持续的过程，涉及信息系统整个（B），因此信息系统安全保障的评估也应该提供一种（B）的信心。

16。金女士经常通过计算机在互联网上购物，从安全角度看，下面哪项是不好的操作习惯___

17。ISO9001-2000标准和鼓励在制定、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，增进顾客满意度，下图是关于过程方法的示意图，图中括号空白处应填写___

18。有关能力成熟度模型（CMM），错误的理解是___。

19。下列关于软件安全开发中的BSI(Build Security In)系列模型说法错误的是___。

20。按照我国信息安全等级保护的有关政策和标准，有些信息系统只需自主定价、自主保护，按照要求向公安机关备案即可，可以不需要上级或主管部门来测评和检查。此类信息系统应属于___。

21。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，根据任务安排，他依据已有的资产列表，逐个分析可能危害这些资产的主体、动机、途径等多种因素，分析这些因素出现机造成损失的可能性大小，并为其赋值。请问，他这个工作属于下面哪一个阶段的工作___。

22。软件存在漏洞和缺陷是不可避免的，实践中常用软件缺陷密度（Defects/KLOC）来衡量软件的安全性，假设某个软件共有29.6万行源代码，总共被检测出145个缺陷啊，则可以计算出其软件缺陷密度值是___.

23。以下哪项制度或标准作为我国的一项基础制度加以推行，并且有一定强制性，其实施的主要目的是有效地提高我国信息和信息系统安全建设的整体水平，重点保障基础信息网络和重要信息系统的安全。___

24。由于信息系统的复杂性，因此需要一个通用的框架对其进行解构和描述，然后再基于此框架讨论信息系统的___。在LATF中，将信息系统的信息安全保障技术层面分为以下四个焦点领域：（C）：区域边界即本地计算环境的外缘；(C)；支持性基础设施，在深度防御技术方案中推荐（C）原则、（C）原则。

25。信息安全保障技术框架（Informetion Assurance Technical Fromwork,IATF）,目的是为保障政府和工业的___提供了（），信息安全保障技术框架的一个核心思想是（A），深度防御战略的三个核心要素：（A）、技术和运行（亦称为操作）

26。图片信息不完整 （没有题干）___

27。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，从而进一步提高了系统的抗击能力，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___

28。TCP/IP协议就Internet最基本的协议，也是Internet构成的基础，TCP/IP通常被认为就是一个N 层协议，每一层都使用它的下一层所提供的网络服务来完成自己的功能，这里N应等于___

29。目前，信息系统面临外部攻击者的恶意攻击威胁，从威胁能力和掌握资源分，这些威胁可以按照个人威胁，组织威胁和国家威胁三个层面划分，则下面选项中属于组织威胁的是___

“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?___

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 can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___

大学生的成才目标是___。

现代人才素质的灵魂是___。

___是人才素质的基础.

世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。

在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可，统一存在的，其中处于主导地位的是___。

时代精神的内涵十分丰富，其中___居于核心地位。

民族精神是一个民族赖以生存和发展的精神支撑。中华民族在五千年的发展中所形成的伟大民族精神的核心是___。

下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。

___是人才素质的基本内容

10。___是我们立党立国的根本指导思想

衡量大学生全面发展的一个重要标准是___

独立生活意识指___

___作为社会主义核心价值体系的精髓，解决的是应当具备什么样的精神状态和精神风貌的问题。

___是人才素质的综合体现.

人们对生活在其中的世界及人与世界的关系的总的看法和根本观点就是___

人生观的核心是___

人的本质属性是___

社会主义社会人生价值标准是___

回答人为什么活着___

表明人应当怎样对待生活___

判别什么样的人生才有意义___

下列人生态度中正确的是___

下列属于正确的人生目的的是___

___认为,金钱可以主宰一切.

___ 认为，社会和他人是达到个人目的的手段。

___认为，人生的全部内容就在于满足感官的需求与快乐。

马克思对于人的本质的论断确立与___

人与自然关系的实质是___

在社会交往和公共生活中公民应该遵守的道德准则是___

社会公德最基本的要求是___

通过其规定和实施，影响人们思想，培养和提高人们法律意识，引导人们依法行为的作用是法律的___