homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.197.183.230
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 52 message thread spans 2 pages: 52 ( [1] 2 > >     
302 Hijacking by google is alive?
hijacked by JAGGER?
Great_Scott

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 1:36 am on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

302 Hijack by google itself is worse than ever before

Many site owners and webmasters who do not know why their website has dropped from google's index may find that their website has been duplicated by google itself and penalized.

Don't think that the 302 hijack problem is over.

In fact, it is worse than ever before.

An inurl: command along with an inachor: may indeed reveal that your website has been duplicated by google's algorithm.

Google's patented duplicate content filter may have imposed a penalty to your website.

How to check;
In google's search box do this;

inurl:www.siverwidget.com
then do;
inurl:www.siverwidget.com

Do the same again but this time
inanchor:www.siverwidget.com
then do;
inanchor:siverwidget.com

There are a few more complex methods but the above two methods can display anomalies to your website.

Your Uniform Resource Location is 100% unique.

Only your website should show in the result. Don't listen to GoogleGuy that other sites can show up. That is absolute crap.

A URL that does show up with your listing can only be a potential unhealthy link that points towards your website via a temporary serverside redirect.

Only your website should show. NO OTHER. If a URL does show and its HEADER LOCATION displays your website and your contents, then google has hijacked your website by causing a duplicate content and summarily penalized your website. This can answer why so many sites just disappear off the radar.

Then only safe listing of another URL having your URL in it is one that contains a hatmless text insertion, but not one that is an actual serverside command.

Good luck.

ps, I can assure you that many hundreds of thousands of sites are in this predicament. It is worse than ever before.

Many site owners who have seen their websites dropped by google will find duplications of their websites under anauthorised URL's and Redirect Links.
.

 

eveolasov

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 4:23 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Distressed here to learn that:

www.mysite.com
and
www.mysite.com/?source=anotherdomain

ARE BOTH INDEXED IN GOOGLE AND EACH ARE SHOWING A PR4.
THE SECOND ONE WAS CACHED IN FEBRUARY, 2005 - SINCE THAT TIME I'VE MADE ENOUGH CHANGES TO MY HOMEPAGE THAT THE 2 URLS AREN'T IDENTICAL BUT STILL ENOUGH SO THAT MY SERPS ARE STRANGE FOR THIS MAIN PAGE. GOOGLE IS SHOWING THE FAKE URL AS A SUPPLEMENTARY RESULT BUT WITH A PR4

WHAT DO I HAVE HERE? I CONTACTED THE WEBMASTER WHO LINKED TO MY SITE WITH THE www.mysite.com/?source=anotherdomain

CAN I USE REMOVAL TOOL TO REMOVE A PAGE THAT'S NOT EVEN PUBLISHED ON MY SITE?

eveolasov

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 4:32 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Great_Scott - I just employed the command inanchor:www.siverwidget.com
and sure enough both the
www.mydomain.com AND
www.mydomain.com/?source=anotherdomain
show up. the second version was never generated by me on any of my pages. It shows an old version of my main page from the time it was cached in February, 2005 which by the way is around the time I fell off the map. After reworking and changing my main page not knowing what exactly was wrong - I managed to regain pretty good serps however there is still a lot duplicated between these two urls.

HOW DO I GET THIS OFF OF GOOGLE'S INDEX?

Great_Scott

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 4:33 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

WHAT DO I HAVE HERE? I CONTACTED THE WEBMASTER WHO LINKED TO MY SITE WITH THE www.mysite.com/?source=anotherdomain

CAN I USE REMOVAL TOOL TO REMOVE A PAGE THAT'S NOT EVEN PUBLISHED ON MY SITE?

eveolasov,

Do not use google's removal tool. It can only damage your site further and has absolutely no benefit for you.

Google is the actual hijacker.

If your sites contents are in another URL that has no authority to contain your exact contents. You will find that it is not the webmasters fault. It is actually google itself that does the hijacking. Be sure that you are a victim of google's methods first.

You can contact the Digital Millennium Copyright Act authority.

Inform them that although google has no legal obligation to list your website, it is allocating the contents of your website to other websites.

Be careful what you say.

Just understand this. It is a myth to think that black hat webmasters hijack websites. It is google that does it.

Good luck.

cornwall

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 4:41 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)


How to check;
In google's search box do this;

inurl:www.siverwidget.com
then do;
inurl:www.siverwidget.com

cough, same search?

Great_Scott

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 4:42 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

eveolasov,

Be absolutely sure you know what you are talking about before doing anythng.

sticky me to check your site for you. I will explain to you if your site is hijacked by google or not.

Never forget this. It is a myth that webmasters are responsible for hijacks. It is google that hijacks websites by appointing the contents of your website into a redirect link. A page is created, with your contents. That is a hijack not a canonical issue unless google has also determined that your website is not worthy to contain information and allocats that info to another websites script redirect link.

GoogleGuy has been noted to say exactly that. If google deems that a website is diminishing in popularity, then google reserves the right to allocate the diminishing sites contents to wherever google wants, by virtue of its haphazard canolicalization methods. In other words, you are not the owner of your source code, google is.
.

[edited by: Great_Scott at 5:01 pm (utc) on Nov. 27, 2005]

Great_Scott

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 4:44 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

cough, same search?

cornwall,

You are intelligent enough to know that I meant www and non www.

Besides. I am not sure that was my error. Posts are edited before they are published.

Thanks for pointing it out.
.

[edited by: Great_Scott at 5:02 pm (utc) on Nov. 27, 2005]

Leosghost

WebmasterWorld Senior Member leosghost us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 4:49 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

@cornwall ..:)
the thot plickens wot ;)

Great_Scott

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 4:53 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Amended first post.

302 Hijack by google itself is worse than ever

It is a myth that black-hat webmasters hijack websites. It is google that hijacks a website and allocates the content from one site to another.

Many site owners and webmasters who do not know why their websites have dropped from google's index may find that their website has been duplicated by google itself and penalized.

Don't think that the 302 hijack problem is over.

In fact, it is worse than ever before.

An inurl: command along with an inachor: may indeed reveal that your website has been duplicated by google's algorithm.

Google's patented duplicate content filter may have imposed a penalty to your website.

How to check;
In google's search box do this;


inurl:www.silverwidget.com
then do;
inurl:silverwidget.com

Do the same again but this time
inanchor:www.silverwidget.com
then do;
inanchor:silverwidget.com


There are a few more complex methods but the above two methods can display anomalies to your website.

Your Uniform Resource Location is 100% unique.

Only your website should show in the result. Don't listen to GoogleGuy that other sites can show up. That is absolute crap.

A URL that does show up with your listing can only be a potential unhealthy link that points towards your website via a temporary serverside redirect.

Only your website should show. NO OTHER. If a URL does show and its HEADER LOCATION displays your website and your contents, then google has hijacked your website by causing a duplicate content and summarily penalized your website. This can answer why so many sites just disappear off the radar.

The only safe listing of another URL having your URL in it is one that contains a harmless text insertion, but not one that is an actual serverside command.

Good luck.

ps, I can assure you that many hundreds of thousands of sites are in this predicament. It is worse than ever before.

Many site owners who have seen their websites dropped by google will find duplications of their websites under anauthorised URL's and Redirect Links.
.

[edited by: Great_Scott at 4:58 pm (utc) on Nov. 27, 2005]

eveolasov

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 4:56 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Should I send this to Google via their "dissatisfied with results" form?

JAGGER 3 - Attn: engineers
Review this:
[google.com...]

The second (indented) url posted here is NOT and has never been my url. Someone linked to my main page this way and the Google Index for some reason cached this url as though it was from my site. The content is my old home page but I NEVER had a URL with /?source=anotherdomain. I believe this has caused major confusion in the results and anguish for me.

Great_Scott

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 5:04 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Leosghost,

You sound like a court jester. Doing cartwheels around dinner tables.

Do you play the pipe too?

kaled

WebmasterWorld Senior Member kaled us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 5:28 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

This is actually a trickyish problem for any search engine to solve. /page.html might be identical to /page.html?param=value - in this case, should both pages be indexed or only one and if only one, which one?
In this simple example, the choice of which one to index is easy but add a few more parameters and the problem gets much more complex.

However, this problem may be tricky, but it is not impossible and Google should have addressed and solved it within months of going live. Of course, originally, it may have been unimportant (other than wasting disk space) but when duplicate content penalties are added to the mix, correct handling of this problem suddenly becomes critical.

Once again, this demonstrates that automated penalties are a very bad idea.

Kaled.

cornwall

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 5:34 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

You are intelligent enough to know that I meant www and non www

Happily I am, though I am not sure how you know that.

But the reason I pointed it out was that 302's, as I know to my cost, are a difficult subject to grasp at the best of times, and I didn't wish to see someone struggling with the subject looking at this instruction in bewilderment ;)

cornwall

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 5:38 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

And on a serious note

Do not use google's removal tool. It can only damage your site further and has absolutely no benefit for you.

I disagree with that. I have found Google's removal tool (provided you know how to use it properly) to have been very useful in removing 302 pages from other people's web sites.

Leosghost

WebmasterWorld Senior Member leosghost us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 5:42 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

G_S
You should try to be less hyperventilated in your tone when you make your posts ..specially if you are going to stick around after "enlightening " all of us..

Answer to your question ..

Nope ..as any semi-domesticated fora troll ..I burst balloons ..and other vessels full of apparently important hot air ..

You forgot to mention that if you do the "inurl" you will almost certainly get 2 more results for your site showing as "supplementals" ..usually the last 2 in the list ..

#1 ..the entry in the wayback machine ..( due to the way they maintain their data base and the way google spiders them ).

#2 ..altavista's ( remember them ) babel fish landing page for a translation of your site ..with your url already in the "translate box" ..

( very neat peice of work by yahoo ..congrats on the code to all at Y )

Neither of these two effects is the fault of google ..( much tho I have issues with google ( and WOW do i have issues )..I have even more so with pundits selling snakeoil and revelations who haven't done their homework ) ..and who attempt to frighten others ....

Must be my anti-messiah reflex ..

BTW ..wanna keep on my nice side ..don't hint that the mods here alter posts to make posters look stupid ..it's usually done unaided by anyone ..;)

Miop

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 5:46 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

What does it mean if I do inanchor:my site and the only results are a few old pages from my site which were dropped from my site 2 years ago and a few defunct directory pages (all supplementals)?

Great_Scott

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 5:46 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)


Happily I am, though I am not sure how you know that.

But the reason I pointed it out was that 302's, as I know to my cost, are a difficult subject to grasp at the best of times, and I didn't wish to see someone struggling with the subject looking at this instruction in bewilderment ;)

cornwall,

I think all people are intelligent by default. That is how I was sure you were too.

I am prepared to give more comprehensive instructions as we go along.

Why not add to what I have suggested. Help others that do not know about the problem?

It is obvious that you have knowledge on this matter.

I would appreciate it.

Thanks.

Dayo_UK

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 5:49 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

How to check;
In google's search box do this;

inurl:www.silverwidget.com
then do;
inurl:silverwidget.com

Do the same again but this time
inanchor:www.silverwidget.com
then do;
inanchor:silverwidget.com

There are a few more complex methods but the above two methods can display anomalies to your website.

Your Uniform Resource Location is 100% unique.

Only your website should show in the result. Don't listen to GoogleGuy that other sites can show up. That is absolute crap.

I 100000000% agree that the problem is all over the place - however, there are reasons why websites that are not your own can be returned in the above results - they are not all hijacks.

Eg. inurl - A website review site can be domain-review.com/url/www.yourdomain.com - and not be a hijack.

In an inanchor search - if for example you submit to a link page and the webmaster of that page changes the displayed url but not the target url then other sites can appear in an inanchor search.

I am pretty sure that Google is having trouble working out the root page of many many many sites - due to either 302 hijack and/or Canonical problems.

but it is not impossible and Google should have addressed and solved it within months

Yes. However, Google seem to have gone for the option of hiding it (and they are doing the hiding very very badly)

Leosghost

WebmasterWorld Senior Member leosghost us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 5:56 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

<snip>

as dayo and the others point out ( and they and many here have spent much greater time than yourself on the point ) there are many ways that this can happen ..it's been discussed at length here and elsewhere ..
<snip>

<as to> the illusion that Google cares about the 302 issue ..why should they ..it only harms webmasters ..

it does not harm their bottom line ..

[edited by: lawman at 6:38 pm (utc) on Nov. 27, 2005]

Dayo_UK

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 6:00 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Leosghost

I can understand why people get so annoyed about it though.

It is sickening really that Google are not even close to figuring out the problem and provide no feedback or assistance on the issue.

OK - it does not effect there bottom line (well as far as we know) - but you would think they would have some level of pride - which would mean they might at least try.

But hey :(

Leosghost

WebmasterWorld Senior Member leosghost us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 6:03 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

miop ..it just means that in order to answer your search "g" is presenting data from it's "cache" ..again ..
this IS a big problem if they hadn't got them selves into the who has the biggest game with Y they would flush their various caches and stop confusing themselves ( by them selves I mean the PHD's at the plex ) ..

But then again ..it only harms webmasters ..it is lower on their list of things that need to be done than showing non tech shareholders how many pages they can index at stockholders meetings since the IPO ..

Fund managers dont come here often enough to see this as a problem ..and would glaze over if you tried to explain it to them ..with some reason ..it does not affect the bottom line ..

dayo ..I hear your pain and sympathise ..

but it is real small beer to them ..as they regard many other things which affect real people here ..inspite of the postings by their PR crew and shills

walkman



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 6:21 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

GG's last comment on this I think was that any site that get's outranked by that, has many problems to begin with--most likely it's penalized. Meaning that a "normal" site wouldn't be affected

Dayo_UK

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 6:37 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

>>>Meaning that a "normal" site wouldn't be affected

Yes, but if you get Canonical url problems your site no longer becomes "normal"

Eg - if you are not protected with a 301 from non-www to www then a link to the non-www can cause all sorts of damage - a 302 to the non-www would cause even more damage.

Leosghost

WebmasterWorld Senior Member leosghost us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 6:43 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

GG speaks on this subject with a forked toungue ..G has a real problem with this and as many have said they don't seem able to fix it ( dont' want to devote the ressources to what for them is geeks problem ..and the ggeks are not doing so well at telling non geeks that there is a problem) ..and would the latter care ..look around you ..;)

If the site in question has a strong enough "identity" it will normally outrank any other for it's own name ..and or url ..but under circumstances entirely beyound the control of the individual webmaster ..sometimes due to events co-inciding ..the site will be overwhelmed in googles pre update spidering by the others which are linked to it ..

this can be manipulated ..both ways

and could have ben mitigated by carefull planning ..

but who would have thought that "g" could scru up so royally on this relatively simple thing and that they wouldn't care to fix it ..in spite of what their PR guy says ( whoever he is pretending to be )..

the problem is once it has hapened one can do pretty much what one wishes ..and to little avail ..as long as "g" keeps injecting their cache from a year or more ago into the equation ( the problem was much worse then..about 18 months ago ) ..but lack of identifying the "real" domain didn't weigh so heavily in the algo as then run ..so most people didn't realise they had a problem in waiting ..

if you were heavily scraped by DMOZ clones at the time ..however it did hurt ..but lasted less time ..but with analysis at the time ..

it was possible to see how to manipulate this ..so this was one of the things you fixed ..

thus leaving you safe this time ..

or manipulated ( depending on your hat )..

and pre manipulated the serps during jagger ..

Lorel

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 7:07 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Great_Scott

How to check;
In google's search box do this;

inurl:www.silverwidget.com
then do;
inurl:silverwidget.com

If you are getting different results for both searches it sounds like you need to 301 redirect the non-www to the www version (or visa-versa).

Miop,


What does it mean if I do inanchor:my site and the only results are a few old pages from my site which were dropped from my site 2 years ago and a few defunct directory pages (all supplementals)?

Something similar happened to a client of mine last month. Only bogus pages showed up in the allinurl search and they dropped out of the Google index and lost all PR. We searched for origianal content in quotes and found the culprit--they had copied the client's home page on 13 of their pages, and had their stolen copy dated which was when our Google traffic, serps and PR disappeared. We wrote the host who insisted on a DMCA report. We also sent one to Google as well as a Google spam report, etc.. The host removed the website mentioned above within a week of getting the DMCA. I'm not sure if google acted or not but and the site command is now back to normal as well as the allinurl and PR is also back. Keyword rank is still Nill even for business name however but that should come back also.

Search for original text in quotes to see if your site has been copied. If so, write the host. It's a waste of time writing a thief to tell him he's a thief.

Walkman:


GG's last comment on this I think was that any site that get's outranked by that, has many problems to begin with--most likely it's penalized. Meaning that a "normal" site wouldn't be affected

This is not true as anyone who has been hijacked already knows. I have had several attemps to hijack my client's sites and they are all spic-n-span clean--no technical problems affecting page rank and all validate, etc. The site mentioned above was squeaky clean and it lost all PR and etc shortly after it's content was hijacked.

Great Scott:

It's a pain in the ____ to have to track down these hijackers and get their content removed but you have two choices:

1. Sit around and complain (and watch your website die off).

2. Track the hijackers down and get them to remove the content. Often the hosts remove the whole website.

For more info on how to stop hijackings and stolen content search for "stop 302 redirects" .

PS the above page also has instructions on what to do about people who don't supply correct whois info when using a domain for illegal purposes.

Lori

annej

WebmasterWorld Senior Member annej us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 9:21 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Is this a hijack? I searched Site:www.mydomain.com and got this.

google.ainex.net/index.php?doc=/search?hl=en& lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=+site:www.mydomain.com+widget - 22k - Supplemental Result

helleborine

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 11:15 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

GG's last comment on this I think was that any site that get's outranked by that, has many problems to begin with--most likely it's penalized. Meaning that a "normal" site wouldn't be affected

I was hijacked during Bourbon, there was no reason for my site to be penalized for any reason.

GG's statement does not add up.

Normal sites ARE routinely affected.

annej

WebmasterWorld Senior Member annej us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 11:32 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

I don't remember Google Guy saying that. Does anyone have the quote? During Bourbon I had the feeling that GG was not blaming webmasters at all and was concerned that the problem needed to be fixed.

Many, many sites in good standing, high PR and doing well in the serps were hijacked during Bourbon. It was not that the site that hijacked me was higher PR or such. It was the way they did the link that caused the hijack.

I don't think it was an intentional hijack. They were doing something to avoid losing PR on outgoing links and it the process caused it.

anttiv

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 11:56 pm on Nov 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

With allinurl:www.domain.net I see a search site with an url like this:
foo.co.uk/go.php?id=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5w
and another site which belongs to me. I put a 301 redirect there a long time ago.

Both are copies of my site. Cache dates are from Oct and Nov 2004. I lost traffic to my site Dec 2004 and it's been ranking nowhere ever since. Could this be the reason?

BillyS

WebmasterWorld Senior Member billys us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 32211 posted 12:24 am on Nov 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Haven't we been through all this before?

According to GG, the only thing that should be unique to your website is the site query, that is:

site:www.foo.com

If you've got other websites showing up for this command, you've got a problem.

This 52 message thread spans 2 pages: 52 ( [1] 2 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved