302 redirect recognized as a backlink?

Has something changed recently? I have found something.

[Wizard]

It has been discussed many times, that if a site A links to site B through 302 redirect, for example because it uses a standard click counting script, this link is not counted as a backlink in Google, even if this actually _is_ a backlink.

I just found something interesting. I wonder if anyone has found something similiar.

I did a link: search for my site. I know that link: command is unreliable, and is said to give a small, random sample of all backlinks Google knows about. I was just curious what sample will I get, usually I check backlinks on MSN.

And one result in link: search was a site that links to me through click counting script, using 302 redirect. I'm sure this site didn't link to me directly. But Google included this site in its backlink sample.

It might mean that link: command becomes even more unreliable than before, showing sites that don't actually link to a site in query.

But it may mean other thing - that Google made a major improvement in 302 redirect handling and now 302 redirected link counts as a backlink (and perhaps passes PR, anchor text and all other stuff links grant to a site). It's worth checking - it would be the end of gaming Google with 302 redirects made in purpose of preserving PageRank on linking site, and perhaps no more 302 hijacking possible - great!

[tedster]

Thanks for that report -- I haven't seen such an example so far, but I wasn't looking for it either. Will definitely keep a watch for it.

[jonrichd]

I've also got a link via a 302 that shows up in Google's Link command. I don't know if it makes any difference, but the link is from an authority site.

[Stefan]

But it may mean other thing - that Google made a major improvement in 302 redirect handling and now 302 redirected link counts as a backlink (and perhaps passes PR, anchor text and all other stuff links grant to a site). It's worth checking - it would be the end of gaming Google with 302 redirects made in purpose of preserving PageRank on linking site, and perhaps no more 302 hijacking possible - great!

Good catch, Wizard. Let's hope you're right.

[jdMorgan]

It would be interesting to know what the actual link code looks like, both to a browser and to a 'bot.

Anybody care to investigate by examining your incoming 302'ed link with a browser (View->Page source) and again cloaked as Googlebot?

It's possible that sophisticated sites may reject the cloaking attempt based on your IP address, but I'd suspect that most won't do so.

Jim

[Wizard]

It would be interesting to know what the actual link code looks like, both to a browser and to a 'bot. Anybody care to investigate by examining your incoming 302'ed link with a browser (View->Page source) and again cloaked as Googlebot?

There's simpler way. Here's the 302 link to my site as it looks in Google cache of linking page:

<a href="wy.pww?id=mysite_identifier">The title of my site</a>

and in the source of the actual page:

<a href="wy.pww?id=mysite_identifier">The title of my site</a>

If they cloaked for Googlebot, the link in Google cache would be different, but it isn't.