2023年四川考研英语考试考前冲刺卷本卷共分为1大题50小题，作答时间为180分钟，总分100分，60分及格一、单项选择题（共50题，每题2分每题的备选项中，只有一个最符合题意） 1.Text 2SoBig. F was the more visible of tile two recent waves of infection, because it propagated itself by e-mail, meaning that victims noticed what was going on. SoBig. F was so effective that it caused substantial disruption even to those protected by anti-virus software. That was because so many copies of the virus spread that many machines were overwhelmed by messages from their own anti-virus software. On top of that, one common counter-measure backfired, increasing traffic still furthers. Anti-virus software often bounces a warning back to the sender of an infected e-mail, saying that the e-mail in question cannot be delivered because it contains a virus. SoBig. F was able to spoof this system by harvesting e-mail addresses from the hard disks of infected computers. Some of these addresses were then sent infected e-mails that had been doctored to look as though they had come from other harvested addresses. The latter were thus sent warnings, even though their machines may not have been infected.Kevin Haley of Symantec, a firm that makes anti-virus software, thinks that one reason SoBig. F was so much more effective than other viruses that work this way is because it was better at searching hard-drives for addresses. Brian King, of CERT, an internet-security center at Carnegie- Mellon University in Pittsburgh, note that, unlike its precursors, SoBig. F was capable of multi- threading: it could send multiple e-mails simultaneously, allowing it to dispatch thousands in minutes.Blaster worked by creating a buffer overrun in the remote procedure call. In other word, that means it attacked a piece of software used by Microsoft’s Windows operating system to allow one computer to control another. It did so by causing that software to use too much memory.Most worms work by exploiting weaknesses in an operating system, but whoever wrote Blaster had a particularly refined sense of humor, since the website under attack was the one from which users could obtain a program to fix the very weakness in Windows that the worm itself was exploiting.One way to deal with a wicked worm like Blaster is to design a fairy godmother worm that goes around repairing vulnerable machines automatically. In the case of Blaster someone seems to have tried exactly that with a program called Welchi. However, according to Mr. Haley, Welchi has caused almost as many problems as Blaster itself, by overwhelming networks with pings -- signals that checked for the presence of other computers.Though both of these programs fell short of the apparent objectives of their authors, they still caused damage. For instance, they forced the shutdown of a number of computer networks, including the one used by the New York Times newsroom, and the one organizing trains operated by CSX, a freight company on America’s east coast. Computer scientists expect that it is only a matter of time before a truly devastating virus is unleashed.We learn from the passage that Welchi is（）A．a wicked worm causing as many damages as Blaster did.B．a program designed by Haley to detect worms like Blaster.C．a program intended to fix the infected machines.D．a worm meant to defeat the virus with pings.2.Text 2SoBig. F was the more visible of tile two recent waves of infection, because it propagated itself by e-mail, meaning that victims noticed what was going on. SoBig. F was so effective that it caused substantial disruption even to those protected by anti-virus software. That was because so many copies of the virus spread that many machines were overwhelmed by messages from their own anti-virus software. On top of that, one common counter-measure backfired, increasing traffic still furthers. Anti-virus software often bounces a warning back to the sender of an infected e-mail, saying that the e-mail in question cannot be delivered because it contains a virus. SoBig. F was able to spoof this system by harvesting e-mail addresses from the hard disks of infected computers. Some of these addresses were then sent infected e-mails that had been doctored to look as though they had come from other harvested addresses. The latter were thus sent warnings, even though their machines may not have been infected.Kevin Haley of Symantec, a firm that makes anti-virus software, thinks that one reason SoBig. F was so much more effective than other viruses that work this way is because it was better at searching hard-drives for addresses. Brian King, of CERT, an internet-security center at Carnegie- Mellon University in Pittsburgh, note that, unlike its precursors, SoBig. F was capable of multi- threading: it could send multiple e-mails simultaneously, allowing it to dispatch thousands in minutes.Blaster worked by creating a buffer overrun in the remote procedure call. In other word, that means it attacked a piece of software used by Microsoft’s Windows operating system to allow one computer to control another. It did so by causing that software to use too much memory.Most worms work by exploiting weaknesses in an operating system, but whoever wrote Blaster had a particularly refined sense of humor, since the website under attack was the one from which users could obtain a program to fix the very weakness in Windows that the worm itself was exploiting.One way to deal with a wicked worm like Blaster is to design a fairy godmother worm that goes around repairing vulnerable machines automatically. In the case of Blaster someone seems to have tried exactly that with a program called Welchi. However, according to Mr. Haley, Welchi has caused almost as many problems as Blaster itself, by overwhelming networks with pings -- signals that checked for the presence of other computers.Though both of these programs fell short of the apparent objectives of their authors, they still caused damage. For instance, they forced the shutdown of a number of computer networks, including the one used by the New York Times newsroom, and the one organizing trains operated by CSX, a freight company on America’s east coast. Computer scientists expect that it is only a matter of time before a truly devastating virus is unleashed.The word "doctored" ( Line 9, Paragraph 1 ) probably means（）A．cured a disease,B．diagnosed a virus.C．became a doctor.D．changed to deceive.3.Text 2SoBig. F was the more visible of tile two recent waves of infection, because it propagated itself by e-mail, meaning that victims noticed what was going on. SoBig. F was so effective that it caused substantial disruption even to those protected by anti-virus software. That was because so many copies of the virus spread that many machines were overwhelmed by messages from their own anti-virus software. On top of that, one common counter-measure backfired, increasing traffic still furthers. Anti-virus software often bounces a warning back to the sender of an infected e-mail, saying that the e-mail in question cannot be delivered because it contains a virus. SoBig. F was able to spoof this system by harvesting e-mail addresses from the hard disks of infected computers. Some of these addresses were then sent infected e-mails that had been doctored to look as though they had come from other harvested addresses. The latter were thus sent warnings, even though their machines may not have been infected.Kevin Haley of Symantec, a firm that makes anti-virus software, thinks that one reason SoBig. F was so much more effective than other viruses that work this way is because it was better at searching hard-drives for addresses. Brian King, of CERT, an internet-security center at Carnegie- Mellon University in Pittsburgh, note that, unlike its precursors, SoBig. F was capable of multi- threading: it could send multiple e-mails simultaneously, allowing it to dispatch thousands in minutes.Blaster worked by creating a buffer overrun in the remote procedure call. In other word, that means it attacked a piece of software used by Microsoft’s Windows operating system to allow one computer to control another. It did so by causing that software to use too much memory.Most worms work by exploiting weaknesses in an operating system, but whoever wrote Blaster had a particularly refined sense of humor, since the website under attack was the one from which users could obtain a program to fix the very weakness in Windows that the worm itself was exploiting.One way to deal with a wicked worm like Blaster is to design a fairy godmother worm that goes around repairing vulnerable machines automatically. In the case of Blaster someone seems to have tried exactly that with a program called Welchi. However, according to Mr. Haley, Welchi has caused almost as many problems as Blaster itself, by overwhelming networks with pings -- signals that checked for the presence of other computers.Though both of these programs fell short of the apparent objectives of their authors, they still caused damage. For instance, they forced the shutdown of a number of computer networks, including the one used by the New York Times newsroom, and the one organizing trains operated by CSX, a freight company on America’s east coast. Computer scientists expect that it is only a matter of time before a truly devastating virus is unleashed.SoBig. F damaged computer programs mainly by（）A．sending them an overpowering number of messages.B．harvesting the addresses stored in the computers.C．infecting the computers with an invisible virus.D．destroying the anti-virus software of the computers.4.Text 2SoBig. F was the more visible of tile two recent waves of infection, because it propagated itself by e-mail, meaning that victims noticed what was going on. SoBig. F was so effective that it caused substantial disruption even to those protected by anti-virus software. That was because so many copies of the virus spread that many machines were overwhelmed by messages from their own anti-virus software. On top of that, one common counter-measure backfired, increasing traffic still furthers. Anti-virus software often bounces a warning back to the sender of an infected e-mail, saying that the e-mail in question cannot be delivered because it contains a virus. SoBig. F was able to spoof this system by harvesting e-mail addresses from the hard disks of infected computers. Some of these addresses were then sent infected e-mails that had been doctored to look as though they had come from other harvested addresses. The latter were thus sent warnings, even though their machines may not have been infected.Kevin Haley of Symantec, a firm that makes anti-virus software, thinks that one reason SoBig. F was so much more effective than other viruses that work this way is because it was better at searching hard-drives for addresses. Brian King, of CERT, an internet-security center at Carnegie- Mellon University in Pittsburgh, note that, unlike its precursors, SoBig. F was capable of multi- threading: it could send multiple e-mails simultaneously, allowing it to dispatch thousands in minutes.Blaster worked by creating a buffer overrun in the remote procedure call. In other word, that means it attacked a piece of software used by Microsoft’s Windows operating system to allow one computer to control another. It did so by causing that software to use too much memory.Most worms work by exploiting weaknesses in an operating system, but whoever wrote Blaster had a particularly refined sense of humor, since the website under attack was the one from which users could obtain a program to fix the very weakness in Windows that the worm itself was exploiting.One way to deal with a wicked worm like Blaster is to design a fairy godmother worm that goes around repairing vulnerable machines automatically. In the case of Blaster someone seems to have tried exactly that with a program called Welchi. However, according to Mr. Haley, Welchi has caused almost as many problems as Blaster itself, by overwhelming networks with pings -- signals that checked for the presence of other computers.Though both of these programs fell short of the apparent objectives of their authors, they still caused damage. For instance, they forced the shutdown of a number of computer networks, including the one used by the New York Times newsroom, and the one organizing trains operated by CSX, a freight company on America’s east coast. Computer scientists expect that it is only a matter of time before a truly devastating virus is unleashed.What can we infer from the last paragraph（）A．Computer scientists are quit optimistic about the existing anti-virus programs.B．Computer scientists are looking forward to the coming anti-virus programs.C．Computer scientists consider the existing viruses not the really destructive ones.D．Computer scientists regard the coming viruses as the really destructive ones.5.Text 2SoBig. F was the more visible of tile two recent waves of infection, because it propagated itself by e-mail, meaning that victims noticed what was going on. SoBig. F was so effective that it caused substantial disruption even to those protected by anti-virus software. That was because so many copies of the virus spread that many machines were overwhelmed by messages from their own anti-virus software. On top of that, one common counter-measure backfired, increasing traffic still furthers. Anti-virus software often bounces a warning back to the sender of an infected e-mail, saying that the e-mail in question cannot be delivered because it contains a virus. SoBig. F was able to spoof this system by harvesting e-mail addresses from the hard disks of infected computers. Some of these addresses were then sent infected e-mails that had been doctored to look as though they had come from other harvested addresses. The latter were thus sent warnings, even though their machines may not have been infected.Kevin Haley of Symantec, a firm that makes anti-virus software, thinks that one reason SoBig. F was so much more effective than other viruses that work this way is because it was better at searching hard-drives for addresses. Brian King, of CERT, an internet-security center at Carnegie- Mellon University in Pittsburgh, note that, unlike its precursors, SoBig. F was capable of multi- threading: it could send multiple e-mails simultaneously, allowing it to dispatch thousands in minutes.Blaster worked by creating a buffer overrun in the remote procedure call. In other word, that means it attacked a piece of software used by Microsoft’s Windows operating system to allow one computer to control another. It did so by causing that software to use too much memory.Most worms work by exploiting weaknesses in an operating system, but whoever wrote Blaster had a particularly refined sense of humor, since the website under attack was the one from which users could obtain a program to fix the very weakness in Windows that the worm itself was exploiting.One way to deal with a wicked worm like Blaster is to design a fairy godmother worm that goes around repairing vulnerable machines automatically. In the case of Blaster someone seems to have tried exactly that with a program called Welchi. However, according to Mr. Haley, Welchi has caused almost as many problems as Blaster itself, by overwhelming networks with pings -- signals that checked for the presence of other computers.Though both of these programs fell short of the apparent objectives of their authors, they still caused damage. For instance, they forced the shutdown of a number of computer networks, including the one used by the New York Times newsroom, and the one organizing trains operated by CSX, a freight company on America’s east coast. Computer scientists expect that it is only a matter of time before a truly devastating virus is unleashed.Compared with SoBig. F, Blaster was a virus that was（）A．more destructive.B．more humorous.C．less vulnerable.D．less noticeable.6.Text 3Of all the truths that this generation of Americans hold self-evident, few are more deeply embedded in the national psyche than the maxim It pays to go to college. Since the GI Bill trans-formed higher education in the aftermath of WWII, a college diploma, once a birthright of the leisured few, has become an attraction for the upwardly mobile, as integral to the American dream as the pursuit of happiness itself. The numbers tell the story: in 1950s, 43% of high-school graduates went on to pursue some form of higher education; at tile same time, only 6% of Americans were college graduates. But by 1998, almost 2 to out of 3 secondary-school graduates were opting for higher education -- and 21% of a much larger U.S. population had college diplomas. As Prof. Herbert London of New York University told a commencement audience last June: the college experience has gone from a rite passage to a right of passage.However, as the class of 2004 is so painfully discovering, while a college diploma remains a requisite credential for ascending the economic ladder, it no longer guarantees the good life. Rarely since the end of the Great Depression has the job outlook for college graduates appeared so bleak: of the 1.1 million students who received their bachelor degrees last spring, fewer than 20% had lined up full-time employment by commencement. Indeed, an uncertain job market has precipitated a wave of economic fear and trembling among the young. Many of my classmates are absolutely terrified, says one of the fortunate few who did manage to land a permanent position. They wonder if they’ll ever find a job.Some of this recession-induced anxiety will disappear if a recovery finally begins to generate jobs at what economists consider a normal rate. But the sad fact is that for the foreseeable future, college graduates will in considerable surplus, enabling employers to require a degree even for jobs for which a college education is really unnecessary. According to Kristina Shelley of the Bureau of Labor Statistics -- who bases her estimate on a moderate projection of current trends -- 30 per- cent of college graduates entering the labor t0rce between now and the year 2008 will be unemployed or will find employment in jobs for which they will be overqualified, joining what economists call the educationally underutilized.Indeed, it may be quite a while-- if ever -- before those working temporarily as cocktail waitresses or taxi drivers will be able to pursue their primary, career paths. Of course waiting on tables and bustling cab fares are respectable ways to earn a living. But they are not quite what so many young Americans -- and their parents -- had in mind as the end product of four expensive years in college.The author tries to convince us that（）A．college education paves the way for future success.B．higher education faces an unforeseeable future.C．a college diploma is the necessary credential for better jobs.D．the purely economic reason for college is not as compelling as it once was.7.Text 3Of all the truths that this generation of Americans hold self-evident, few are more deeply embedded in the national psyche than the maxim It pays to go to college. Since the GI Bill trans-formed higher education in the aftermath of WWII, a college diploma, once a birthright of the leisured few, has become an attraction for the upwardly mobile, as integral to the American dream as the pursuit of happiness itself. The numbers tell the story: in 1950s, 43% of high-school graduates went on to pursue some form of higher education; at tile same time, only 6% of Americans were college graduates. But by 1998, almost 2 to out of 3 secondary-school graduates were opting for higher education -- and 21% of a much larger U.S. population had college diplomas. As Prof. Herbert London of New York University told a commencement audience last June: the college experience has gone fro。
