| 9:09 pm on Mar 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
There was a fairly lenghty discussion about this site previously ( unfortunatly I can't seem to find it now ).
My suggestion - unless you have Chinese customers - ban the entire Country.
I've also done the same with Korea, Taiwan, India, and a few others - no customers expected, and no need to waste bandwith or deal with the prevalent fraud.
No offense meant to any of our fellow members that may reside in these areas - just a business decision I've chosen to take.
[edited by: bobothecat at 9:15 pm (utc) on Mar. 6, 2005]
| 9:14 pm on Mar 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yes, I've noticed their referals in my logs for several weeks and found my pages hijacked as well. But since I disallow several content, images & scripting directories by referer, their version of my pages looked awful and didn't work. My hijacked pages were/are not indexed by Google (yet.)
Have you reported them to Google?
| 9:22 pm on Mar 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Can you help me ban them by referrer? I tried disallowing hotlinking of images via .htaccess but they still show my images?
| 9:32 pm on Mar 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Thata's all I'm doing. Try again. When you check their (your) site, make sure you've cleared cache.
However, I'm not saying it fixes the hijacking issue.
| 9:35 pm on Mar 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"Can you help me ban them by referrer?"
I don't think referrer will help much... however banning/denying the following IP ranges in .htaccess should:
219.128. thru 219.136. & 219.138.
| 2:52 am on Mar 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This has been discussed before: Piracy on a gigantic scale [webmasterworld.com]
| 3:35 am on Mar 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
that is very discouraging if it was brought up on 1-21-05 and they are still indexed on Google.
It's frustrating when something genuinely evil like this gets away with it but if we link to a "bad neighborhood" we get banned...
This is Google PageRank manipulation on a huge scale.
| 8:36 pm on Mar 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yesterday, I blocked the IP ranges mentioned above and they started using another network within 12 hours. You will also want to block 22.214.171.124 - 126.96.36.199. So far, so good here.
| 3:15 am on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
In the short term, you can change the destination page robots metatag to "noindex" then submit the urls through Google removal tool. Make sure you immediately change the metatag back to index. The offending urls will be gone in 24 hours.
| 3:26 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
cam someone post the .htaccess thingy to
ban China, India, Romania etc.
I have ZERO customers over there.
| 3:41 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
how do you guys feel about the <meta name="robots" content="noarchive">
does it hurt rankings?
| 3:41 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This was all dealt with I believe in the Apache Forum where this thread was originally started:-
I appreciate it's a touchy subject, but please, let's keep away from the politics and any specifics.
| 4:33 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Anyone have any suggestions on the best way to block and ip range on an IIS box?
| 4:43 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
press the power button...
From IIS, right click on the web and choose properties. Click the directory security tab. Click Edit... in the IP address and domain name restrictions section. By default, everyone is granted access, and anything you add will be blocked. I would start with doing the group 188.8.131.52 255.0.0.0. This will block about 70% of what you would consider terrorist harboring countries. It's designated as Europe, but this is where most of the activity was from.
[edited by: trillianjedi at 4:49 pm (utc) on Mar. 10, 2005]
[edit reason] Please don't disguise links. [/edit]
| 4:48 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Am I missing the point here. What damage is this proxy actually doing?
I can see that you'll lose ad revenue if anyone were to surf their site instead of yours (assuming your ad provider works using http referer), but is anyone actually likely to use their site to browse the web?
Surely nobody will find their version on the search engines (Google at least) because it will trigger the duplicate content filter.
| 4:49 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|cam someone post the .htaccess thingy to |
ban China, India, Romania etc.
I have ZERO customers over there.
You are George Bush and I claim my five pounds. ;-)
| 4:53 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
The plot thickens. I banned these guys awhile back with .htaccess. But they went and got some new IPs. Ok so now I'm banning the new IPs too. But the funniest thing is --and this proves that they are SOBs who are purposely trying thwart our preventative measures-- is that I just got a screen shot of them using Mediapartners-Googlebot/2.1 as their referring agent. They are purposely trying to thwart .htaccess by referring agent.
Unfortunately, China is very important to my websites so I can't just ban China.
| 4:56 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Surely nobody will find their version on the search engines (Google at least) because it will trigger the duplicate content filter. |
Not true. Another version of my site was indexed on google. At least until I filed DMCA Notice.
[edited by: trillianjedi at 5:04 pm (utc) on Mar. 10, 2005]
[edit reason] See above [/edit]
| 5:00 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
sorry I didn't know that site was banned.
sorry for disguising the link as well.
sticky me if you want to url
| 5:02 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Not true. Another version of my site was indexed on google. At least until I filed DMCA Notice. |
I'm not suggesting Google won't index it. I'm just saying it's unlikely to beat the original page in the SERPS because it's a copy.
There are plenty of duplicates of my sites that people have made knocking around on the web and they never appear anywhere useful in the search results.
You imply that this site is stealing credit card details. Are they actually doing this (is there any evidence), or are people just erring on the side of caution?
| 5:19 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I just banned APNIC entirely. Got sick of dealing with endless stolen credit card orders. Now, no stolen cards.
| 5:30 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"This was all dealt with I believe in the Apache Forum where this thread was originally started"
all they had is a few IP addresses. I rather ban entire countries.
| 5:44 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|all they had is a few IP addresses. I rather ban entire countries. |
Yup, you'll also need the IP ranges for those countries of course (I can't help there). I referred to the thread as jdmorgans last post in there gives the actual .htaccess code for banning a range which I thought might be helpful (perhaps to others if not you specifically).
| 5:47 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Just out of interest.
Are there any non-Americans here contemplating banning entire coutries from their web sites?
| 5:57 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm still a noobie on this site when it comes to some of the terms on this site. Can someone tell me what
<snip> means when I see it?
| 5:58 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"Are there any non-Americans here contemplating banning entire coutries from their web sites?"
here's the explanation, without turning this into "those arrogant americans":
NO ONE from let's say China benefits me, and no one from China benefits from my (one) site. On one hand I have nothing to gain, but I can lose my rankings over it because some Chinese site decides to copy my site. What should I do?
decisions, decisions, decisions...
| 6:23 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|what <snip> means when I see it? |
The poster included something that is probably against the TOS (terms of service) for this website, so the moderator used his scissors to remove it. This usually involves posting URLs to other websites.
| 6:27 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This kind of proxying is done by sites in the US too:
These guys are out of New York. I've banned these guys too. But what I don't like about the Chinese version is the following:
(1) They alter the links on the page they serve, hence they are defacing your webpage.
(2) Any personal info that gets submitted will be submitted through them, which is a huge security/privacy threat (which is not the case with the proxy service listed above from New York).
(3) The proxy service (from New York) above does not try to mask their user agent making it easy to ban them, but the chinese version does. I caught them this morning pretending to be googlebot. And then something else later. That is sneaky.
I can't emphasize (2) enough. Somebody thinks they are on your website and trusts you, but ends up submitting personal info to them.
| 7:20 pm on Mar 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Well, I am not from China, but I think that when searching for a web site we should write [usw.....com...] (United States Web) instead of [....com...] (World Wide Web)
I am in affiliate marketing for several months and what I have seen is that affiliate marketing isn't something that can be done from any country; It can be done only from certain countries (the "rich ones"). (And especially from the USA).
For example, there are some affiliate programs that say "banned countries" but also "if you loging from some of this countries you will be banned" And also, the best affiliate programs are reserved only for US residents!
There has been also an issue with the Godaddy domain registration service: they banned entire countries without informing the customers from this countries before doing it and many couldn't renewal their domain names. I wonder what will happen if something like this happens in a "good" country, like the USA.
In conclusion, in what should this countries specialize? In spam? Well, if the "good way to use the internet has been forbidden for them"...
If you are from one of this countries and want to build a web site how can you monetize it?
They ever can't browse freely the internet to analyze their competition or purchase something online.
I think that if thinks continue so a parallel internet for "bad" countries will be created. Just continue so...
| This 64 message thread spans 3 pages: 64 (  2 3 ) > > |