8582017年12月英语六级真题第3套

2021年1月8日发(作者：蒋麟昌)
2017年12月英语六级真题（第三套）
Part I Writing （30 minutes）
Directions:
For this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to write an essay commenting
on the saying “Respect others, and you will be respected”. You can
cite examples to illustrate your views. You should write at least 150
words but no more than 200 words.

Part II Listening Comprehension （30 minutes）
卷三听力部分与卷二相同

Part III Reading Comprehension （40 minutes）
Section A
Directions:
In this section, there is a passage with ten blanks. You are required
to select one word for each blank from a list of choices given in a word
bank following the passage. Read the passage through carefully before
making your choices. Each choice in the bank is identified by a letter.
Please mark the corresponding letter for each item on Answer Sheet 2 with
a single line through the centre. You may not use any of the words in
the bank more than once.


Questions 26 to 35 are based on the following passage.
Many European countries have been making the shift to electric vehicles and
Germany has just stated that they plan to ban the sales of vehicles using gasoline
and diesel as fuel by 2030. The country is also planning to reduce its carbon
footprint by 80-95% by 2050, ___26___ a shift to green energy in the country.
Effectively, the ban will include the registration of new cars in the country as
they will not allow any gasoline ___27___ vehicle to be registered after 2030.
Part of the reason this ban is being discussed and ___28___ is because energy
officials see that they will not reach their emissions goals by 2050 if they do not
___29___ a large portion of vehicle emissions. The country is still ___30___ that
it will meet its emissions goals, like reducing emissions by 40% by 2020, but the
___31___ of electric cars in the country has not occurred as fast as expected.
Other efforts to increase the use of electric vehicles include plans to build
over 1 million hybrid and electric car battery charging stations across the country.
By 2030, Germany plans on having over 6 million charging stations ___32___. According
to the
International Business Times
, electric car sales are expected to increase
as Volkswagen is still recovering from its emissions scandal.
There are ___33___ around 155,000 registered hybrid and electric vehicles on
German roads, dwarfed by the 45 million gasoline and diesel cars driving there now.
As countries continue setting goals of reducing emissions, greater steps need to
be taken to have a ___34___ effect on the surrounding environment. While the efforts
are certainly not ___35___, the results of such bans will likely only start to be
seen by generations down the line, bettering the world for the future.
注意：此部分试题请在答题卡2上作答。
A) acceptance
B) currently














I) incidentally
J) installed
C) disrupting
D) eliminate
E) exhaust
F) futile
G) hopeful
H) implemented

Section B




K) noticeable
L) powered
M) restoration
N) skeptical
O) sparking
Directions:
In this section, you are going to read a passage with ten statements
attached to it. Each statement contains information given in one of the
paragraphs. Identify the paragraph from which the information is derived.
You may choose a paragraph more than once. Each paragraph is marked with
a letter. Answer the questions by marking the corresponding letter on
Answer Sheet 2.


Apple’s Stance Highlights a More Confrontational Teach Industry
[A] The battle between Apple and law enforcement officials over unlocking a
terrorist’s smartphone is the culmination of a slow turning of the tables between
the technology industry and the United States government.

[B] After revelations by the former National Security Agency contractor Edward J.
Snowden in 2013 that the government both
cozied up to
(讨好) certain tech companies
and hacked into others to gain access to private data on an enormous scale, tech
giants began to recognize the United States government as a hostile actor. But if
the confrontation has crystallized in this latest battle, it may already be heading
toward a predictable conclusion: In the long run, the tech companies are destined
to emerge victorious.

[C] It may not seem that way at the moment. On the one side, you have the United
States government’s mighty legal and security apparatus fighting for data of the
most sympathetic sort: the secrets buried in a dead mass murderer’s phone. The
action stems from a federal court order issued on Tuesday requiring Apple to help
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to unlock an iPhone used by one of the
two attackers who killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California, in December.

[D] In the other corner is the world’s most valuable company, whose chief executive,
Timothy Cook, has said he will appeal the court’s order. Apple argues that it is
fighting to preserve a principle that most of us who are addicted to our smartphones
can defend: Weaken a single iPhone so that its contents can be viewed by the American
government and you risk weakening all iPhones for any government intruder, anywhere.

[E] There will probably be months of legal confrontation, and it is not at all clear
which side will prevail in court, nor in the battle for public opinion and legislative
favor. Yet underlying all of this is a simple dynamic: Apple, Google, Facebook and
other companies hold most of the cards in this confrontation. They have our data,
and their businesses depend on the global public’s collective belief that they will
do everything they can to protect that data.

[F] Any crack in that front could be fatal for tech companies that must operate
worldwide. If Apple is forced to open up an iPhone for an American law enforcement
investigation, what is to prevent it from doing so for a request from the Russians
or the Iranians? If Apple is forced to write code that lets the FBI get into the
Phone 5c used by Syed Rizwan Farook, the male attacker in the San Bernardino attack,
who would be responsible if some hacker got hold of that code and broke into its
other devices?

[G] Apple’s stance on these issues emerged post-Snowden, when the company started
putting in place a series of technologies that, by default, make use of
encryption
(加
密) to limit access to people’s data. More than that, Apple, and, in different ways,
other tech companies, including Google, Facebook, Twitter and Microsoft, have made
their opposition to the government’s claims a point of corporate pride.

[H] Apple’s emerging global brand is privacy; it has staked its corporate reputation,
not to mention the investment of considerable technical and financial resources,
on limiting the sort of mass surveillance that was uncovered by Mr. Snowden. So now,
for many cases involving governmental intrusions into data, once-lonely privacy
advocates find themselves fighting alongside the most powerful company in the world.

[I]“A comparison point is in the 1990s battles over encryption,” said Kurt Opsahl,
general counsel of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy watchdog group.
“Then you had a few companies involved, but not one of the largest companies in
the world coming out with a lengthy and impassioned post, like we saw yesterday from
Timothy Cook. Its profile has really been raised.”

[J] Apple and other tech companies hold another ace: the technical means to keep
making their devices more and more inaccessible. Note that Apple’s public
opposition to the government’s request is itself a hindrance to mass government
intrusion. And to get at the contents of a single iPhone, the government says it
needs a court order and Apple’s help to write new code; in earlier versions of the
iPhone, ones that were created before Apple
found religion on
(热衷于) privacy, the
FBI may have been able to break into the device by itself.

[K] You can expect that
noose
(束缚) to continue to tighten. Experts said that whether
or not Apple loses this specific case, measures that it could put into place in the
future will almost certainly be able to further limit the government’s reach.

[L] That’s not to say that the outcome of the San Bernardino case is insignificant.
As Apple and several security experts have argued, an order compelling Apple to write
software that gives the FBI access to the iPhone in question would establish an
unsettling precedent. The order essentially asks Apple to hack its own devices, and
once it is in place, the precedent could be used to justify law enforcement efforts
to get around encryption technologies in other investigations far removed from
national security threats.

[M] Once armed with a method for gaining access to iPhones, the government could
ask to use it
proactively
(先发制人地), before a suspected terrorist attack—leaving
Apple in a bind as to whether to comply or risk an attack and suffer a public-relations
nightmare. “This is a brand-new move in the war against encryption,” Mr. Opsahl
said. “We’ve had plenty of debates in Congress and the media over whether the
government should have a backdoor, and this is an
end run
(迂回战术) aroundthat—here
they come with an order to create that backdoor.”

[N] Yet it’s worth noting that even if Apple ultimately loses this case, it has
plenty of technical means to close a backdoor over time. “If they’re anywhere near
worth their salt as engineers, I bet they’re rethinking their threat model as we
speak,” said Jonathan Zdziarski, a digital expert who studies the iPhone and its
vulnerabilities.

[O] One relatively simple fix, Mr. Zdziarski said, would be for Apple to modify future
versions of the iPhone to require a user to enter a passcode before the phone will
accept the sort of modified operating system that the FBI wants Apple to create.
That way, Apple could not unilaterally introduce a code that weakens the iPhone—a
user would have to consent to it.

[P]“Nothing is 100 percent hacker-proof,” Mr. Zdziarski said, but he pointed out
that the judge’s order in this case required Apple to provide “reasonable security
assistance” to unlock Mr. Farook’s phone. If Apple alters the security model of
future iPhones so that even its own engineers’ “reasonable assistance” will not
be able to crack a given device when compelled by the government, a precedent set
in this case might lose its lasting force. In other words, even if the F.B.I. wins
this case, in the long run, it loses.
注意：此部分试题请在答题卡2上作答。
36. It is a popular belief that tech companies are committed to protecting their
customers’ private data.
37. The US government believes that its access to people’s iPhones could be used
to prevent terrorist attacks.
38. A federal court asked Apple to help the FBI access data in a terrorist’s iPhone.
39. Privacy advocates now have Apple fighting alongside them against government
access to personal data.
40. Snowden revealed that the American government had tried hard to access private
data on a massive scale.
41. The FBI might have been able to access private data in earlier iPhones without
Apple’s help.
42. After the Snowden incident, Apple made clear its position to counter government
intrusion into personal data by means of encryption.
43. According to one digital expert, no iPhone can be entirely free from hacking.