Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
I assume Matt Cutts is playing April Fools on us with his "hacked site."
Could be hackers playing April Fools on Matt... It's hard to tell. Certainly a great bit of viral marketing, if that's what it is. ;)
Ditto with the Adsense ads on WebmasterWorld. ;) :(
[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 6:14 am (utc) on April 1, 2007]
All Matt Cutts pages are defaced. Try this search on Google:
webmasterworld site:www.mattcutts.com [google.com]
Click on any of Matt Blog's pages and you see its defaced. Don't think that Matt will do such a thing.
As to Adsense ads on WebmasterWorld, I think they look GREAT :-)
[edited by: reseller at 7:51 am (utc) on April 1, 2007]
Is that so bad?
am a fan of adsense (aren't we all?) but it's just that some of us might get used to the clean adfree look of WWW, yes? Also the integration is very bad with the default ads colors.
Adsense on webmasterworld, toilet wifi, french hacking... I am confused or maybe just a fool... lol
yes too much for us in one day!
I started a separate thread for that toilet fool :)
The pages are giving a 302 redirect back to the /blog/index.html. 302=temporary redirect. If it really was someone trying to do damage they were being very polite using a 302 redirect and not a 301 redirect. The 302 works perfectly in this situation by telling the search engines that there is a new page in place of the old, but ignore that new page for now since it won't be there for very long.
That setup also allows him to just drop in the /blog/index.html file where there was just a /blog/index.php file, then build a new .httaccess file for the 302 redirect.... that makes things really easy to quickly change back later.
My $.02 guess.
If it really was someone trying to do damage they were being very polite using a 302 redirect and not a 301 redirect.
Quite the opposite, if someone wanted to do damage they would use a 302 temporary redirect to the page instead of a 301.
Looks like a legit hack to me....
Quite the opposite, if someone wanted to do damage they would use a 302 temporary redirect
I'm talking about 302 redirect within the same domain. This to me (an April Fools joke) seems like a classic case for a 302 redirect. You want to keep all of your old pages indexed, so you wouldn't want to use a 301 (permanent) from all of your pages to the new joke page. A 302 (temporary) redirect will let the search engines to know "I'm sending users to this new page for now, but don't do anything since it won't be like this for long and the redirect will go away soon."
Googlers in the past have talked about using a 302 redirect if for example you have a page on your site that is getting tons of digg/slashdot traffic to redirect from a dynamic URL to a static. You take the content of the popular dynamic page, put up a new temporary static page, and then 302 redirect to the new URL.
A 301 redirect from each page to the new (hacked/joke) page would cause more of an issue. Googlers have said in the past that tons of 301 redirects to one on-domain page can look suspicious.
I seem to recall an example too where someone asked Google about how to deal with your site if you know you are going to have a period of downtime... for an upgrade or other situation... It was suggested a sitewide 302 redirect to a page explaining the upgrade would work best for the search engines since they would see the redirect as temporary, ignoring whatever they find on the temporary page.
BTW, on cattscon he recognized his site being hacked, but didn't mention possible revenge.