Kenton
msg:725811 | 10:00 pm on Mar 12, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Hi Japanese One of my users has accused me of "hijacking" their site after reading your articles. This is because I use a cgi script to track clicks on their link. Is there anyway I can run the trace that you run in your posting so I can prove to them (and myself) that I'm not a hijacker? Thanks
|
shri
msg:725812 | 1:11 am on Mar 13, 2005 (gmt 0) |
If you've not specifically coded your tracker to send a 301, or excluded it from robots.txt, chances are you have inadvertantly hijacked.
|
Kenton
msg:725813 | 2:32 am on Mar 13, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I just downloaded a free click tracker cgi. Does doing a google [allinurl: theirdomain.com] and finding my site in the results proved I've hijacked?
|
japanese
msg:725814 | 4:01 am on Mar 13, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Kenton, Its not your fault. You sound concerned and I raise my hat to you. This is a google problem. Follow the main thread at [webmasterworld.com...] And please contribute to the thread with a comment describing your anxiety. As indicated by shri, a good reply. But it still remains google's problem to fix.
|
artdog
msg:725815 | 2:44 pm on Mar 13, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Forgive me that other thread is so long and I haven't had time to keep up with it. Can we request removal from Alexa and will they honor it?
|
DumpedbyG
msg:725816 | 8:45 pm on Mar 13, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I have asked Alex to remove my site and they promptly did so. It is also important to add the following to your robot.txt file to ensure that Alex will not index your site again. User-agent: ia_archiver
Disallow: /
|
idonen
msg:725817 | 2:29 am on Mar 14, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I know know if this is such a problem any more. When I do a search in google for inurl:redirect.alexa.com I get a grand total of 3(!) listings. On goes to Amazon, strangely enough, and the other two are just 404s at alexa. So perhaps google has already taken care of this? Or am I missing something...
|
incrediBILL
msg:725818 | 9:22 pm on Mar 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| I have asked Alex to remove my site and they promptly did so. |
|
Japanese has the villagers all running amok with torches looking to burn witches. Why would you do that? Alexa is not malicious, not in the slightest. Yahoo uses a 302 redirect, did ya know that? Go tell them to promptly remove you as well....
|
DumpedbyG
msg:725819 | 9:41 pm on Mar 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
incrediBILL - I receive no trafic from Alexa, why should I take a change? Japanese - Any comments?
|
incrediBILL
msg:725820 | 9:47 pm on Mar 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
There was never anything to chance with Alexa but the fear mongers have won. I give up. Elvis has left the building.
|
mrMister
msg:725821 | 9:52 pm on Mar 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| Japanese has the villagers all running amok with torches looking to burn witches |
|
Yes, I quite agree. It is hilarious to see these people over-reacting to the issue. So many people believing their site has been hijacked when in actual fact it hasn't. If they'd bother to study the subject and learn how 302 hijacking works, they'd find that it isn't too hard to spot the difference between a normal 302 redirect and a malicious (hijacking) 302 redirect. Still. With all these people running around getting their backlinks pulled, it can only be good news for the rankings of the rest of us :-)
|
DumpedbyG
msg:725822 | 10:16 pm on Mar 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
incrediBILL - I think Japanese has investigated this problem in-depth and had made a good case for his point of view. You have said nothing to proof your case!
|
Lorel
msg:725823 | 11:20 pm on Mar 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Because of the 302 redirecting link I asked Alexa to remove my site and 25 of my clients also--all in separate letters. They wrote back with the following:
If you're referring to the fact that we redirect before the site leaves
Alexa.com, but still deliver the visitors to the site in question, it is
our right to use redirects to track where people go on our site and that
behavior will not be changed.
|
|
I don't now, nor have I EVER, seen any traffic from Aleza for any of my 25 clients so no great loss even if I am wrong in worrying about this redirect. PS. they haven't removed the links and it's been about a week now.
|
mrMister
msg:725824 | 11:31 pm on Mar 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| I challenge "googleguy" "google" "msnsearch" or more learned search engine specialists to disprove this cast iron fact. |
|
I think you'll find that society generally abides by the "innocent until proven guilty" guide, and most people would expect the onus to be on you to prove your own allegations. 302 redirects in themselves are not capable of properly hijacking a site They do change the site listing in Google and cause searchers to take an extra hop via the redirecting server before arriving at their destination. However, in order to fully hijack a site, the redirecting site has to implement some extra code other than the 302 redirect.
|
incrediBILL
msg:725825 | 11:45 pm on Mar 17, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| I think Japanese has investigated this problem in-depth and had made a good case for his point of view. You have said nothing to proof your case! |
|
Japanese make a case about some site hijackings but Alexa has been around forever and has all of us in their web directory so suddenly a call to arms with villagers and torches is just plain nuts. I've asked before and have not been shown a single site "hijacked" by Alexa! Show me proof and I'll agree with his premise on Alexa - anyone EVER see a site hijacking by Alexa's scripts? Considering Alexa has just about every site in the internet indexed wouldn't it make sense if Alexa hijacking was an issue that they would've hijacked EVERYONE that could and would be hijacked by now? Did his homework....
|
DumpedbyG
msg:725826 | 5:43 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Alexa add no value to our sites, so I rather stay out of there index.
|
incrediBILL
msg:725827 | 6:16 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Alexa is a marketing tool, somewhat limited in scope, but I've found it very useful. It's a shame you didn't learn what it's useful for before the master of hysteria riled you up. I'm just waiting to see how many of you drink the koolaid when Japanese tell you it's time.
|
T_Rex
msg:725828 | 7:38 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I think I'll just find out somehow what Alexa's IP's are and use .htaccess to block their range the same way I did with Cyveillance. It goes something like this:
<Files *>
order deny,allow
deny from env=ban
allow from env=allowsome
deny from 63.148.99.224/27
deny from 65.118.41.192/27
</Files>
The deny from env=ban is part of a spider-trap setup. I havn't seen them hit the trap since.
|
incrediBILL
msg:725829 | 8:21 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Go for it T_REX! - if you paid attention you would notice Alexa says "powered by Google" Blocking Google should to work out real nice for you, let us know the results.
|
T_Rex
msg:725830 | 9:49 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Google's IP range is 216.239.32.0 through 216.239.63.255. Alexa started with Yahoo.
I am interested in the IP range used by Alexa. I will look into it and try to find what they are using as I said in my post. Does anyone know?
|
incrediBILL
msg:725831 | 9:52 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Someone spiked the bong again and once more I didn't get an invite, I'm annoyed. Alexa doesn't crawl sites - they use Google - why would you waste your time? They collect their traffic data from the users of the Alexa Toolbar.
|
Safaridude
msg:725832 | 10:21 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Not sure if it means anything but the site that hijacked me has set up his directory site using the exact listings as they appear in the alexa toolbar. That's where he found my site and many others to do a 302 link to. But he could probably just as well have used the google results or Dmoz so can't really blame alexa for showing sites that are being visited. Or is it something more sinister?
|
tallguy
msg:725833 | 10:42 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
How can alexa do this?
I wonder if they will get protest mails after reading this forum.
I hope google is aware of this.
|
incrediBILL
msg:725834 | 10:56 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
OK, I'm officially ROFLMAO Time for bed.
|
DumpedbyG
msg:725835 | 11:09 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
incrediBILL you are wrong again! I quote from there website:
"Alexa is continually crawling all publicly available web sites to create a series of snapshots of the Web. We use the data we collect to create features and services: Site Information: Traffic rankings, pictures of sites, links pointing to sites and more
Related Links: Sites that are similar to the one you are currently viewing
Alexa has been crawling the Web since early 1996, and we have continually increased the amount of information that we gather. We are currently gathering approximately 1.6 Terabytes (1600 gigabytes) of Web content per day. After each snapshot of the Web, which takes approximately two months to complete, Alexa has gathered 4.5 Billion pages from over 16 million sites."
|
mrMister
msg:725836 | 11:19 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I quote from there website:
"Alexa is continually crawling all publicly available web sites to create a series of snapshots of the Web. We use the data we collect to create features and services: |
|
I can't stress enough how silly this conversation is. You obviously don't understand Alexa, grabbing random quotes off their site isn't going to help. The archiver that is mentioned in that quote would prevent a graphical preview of your site, and that's about it. You can stop it with robots.txt if you want but it won't take your listing down. Nor would you want to. They are not hijacking sites. Simple as that. If Alexa was really hijacking sites then there would be examples of it, it would be clear to see in Google. They aren't. If anyone thinks that Alexa is hijacking their site then sticky me. I'm waiting for the evidence... /me watches the tumbleweed getting blown across his stickymail inbox.
|
DumpedbyG
msg:725837 | 11:41 am on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
tallguy - incrediBILL stated that Alexa does not Crawl site, the quote was just to proof how wrong he is. My site was one of the sites which were affected by the Feb Google update. I got my site de-listed from Alexa and a week later I'm back in the SERP!
|
incrediBILL
msg:725838 | 3:36 pm on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| incrediBILL stated that Alexa does not Crawl site |
|
I was talking in terms of building the SEARCH results, plainly says "Powered by Google" Something Alexa DOES do that I forgot about (it was late) is they feed the Internet Archive (archive.org) WayBack Machine which is why their little crawler is actually called "ia_archiver". To prevent ia_archiver from visiting add this to your robots.txt file: User-agent: ia_archiver
Disallow: / Of course then you'll never show up in the WayBack Machine and service has been useful more than once in copyright disputes to prove how long ago specific text was on my site. I can admit when I make an oversight :)
|
mrMister
msg:725839 | 3:44 pm on Mar 18, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| incrediBILL stated that Alexa does not Crawl site, the quote was just to proof how wrong he is. |
|
Actually, incrediBILL is right. It's not Alexa that's crawling the site, it's The Internet Archive's Wayback machine. The Wayback machine uses Alexa's database of sites (gathered from Alexa toolbar users), but Alexa and the Internet Archive are two seperate organisiations. Take this as another scenario... Q. If Google were to allow you to access their database of 8 billion URLs, and you were to write a program to crawl each of those URLs, who would be doing the crawling? A. You of course! By your logic, it seems that you would believe that Google would be doing the crawling!
|
| This 36 message thread spans 2 pages: 36 ( [1] 2 ) > > |
|
|
