How to fix "attackers sometime mimic sites by ."

[mancunian]

OK so Chrome says to visitors to our website

"attackers sometime mimic sites by making hard to see changes to the web address"

The website is 100% genuine. It does have a hyphen in the domain name which makes it similar to another website in the same industry.

Is there anything as a webmaster I can do to sop this appearing as it is keeping visitors way.

Thank you in advance

[not2easy]

Is your site using https: protocols?

[mancunian]

Yes

[not2easy]

And do you have canonical rewrite (301) to only offer one URL to all visitors? If an old link - or backlink -points to http://example.com/, does the visitor end up on the current https://www.example.com/ URL via 301 (permanent) rewrite?

[lammert]

It does have a hyphen in the domain name which makes it similar to another website in the same industry.

It seems Google's algorithm is working properly. You tried to mimic a competitor with a hyphen and Google detected it. The solution would be to use your own brand domain instead of copycatting others.

[mancunian]

Yes canonicals are properly set up as tags within the pages.

This is not the Google algorithm - it is Chrome browser and we are not mimicing anybody - millions of genuine websites have similar website names. Chrome is unfairly hurting our website.

I wonder if there is some code or authentication process available to prove the website is genuine?

[lammert]

It's Google's software algorithm in Chrome. Google is more than search and an algorithm is more than a way to sort SERPs :)

[mancunian]

When people refer to "the Google algorithm" they are on about something which runs on remote servers owned by Google not client side software on Chrome just to clarify.

Anyway hopefully somebody has some helpful tip as the website has been running okay for years and existed before the competitor's website - it is certainly not a phishing site lol

[not2easy]

Yes canonicals are properly set up as tags within the pages.

That is not what I asked.

Canonical meta tags only tell Google which version of a page you prefer to index but it does nothing for visitors. That is why I asked. Canonical rewrites ensure that there are not multiple versions of a domain that can be visited. If visitors (and Google) can visit multiple versions of the same content it is not a good thing.

If an old link - or backlink -points to http://example.com/, does the visitor end up on the current https://www.example.com/ URL via 301 (permanent) rewrite?

Try to visit your site with the "wrong" protocol and see if you are redirected to the correct URL.

Although using the same domain name as another site with only a hyphen to differentiate them is something Google does not recommend for success and might be why they warn visitors, especially if the non-hyphenated domain is a brand or trade name.

[mancunian]

not2easy thank you.

Are you saying to put a 301 redirect to our own domain with a hyphen in in .htaccess or something else?

Please explain what you mean by a canonical redirect thank you.

[not2easy]

Yes, you should not have multiple URLs for one domain, it confuses Google. When you decide on which URL you want to use, you shuld rewrite all other versions to that one URL. Google considers https://www.example.com/ a different domain from https://example.com/ and they may see the different vesions as imitators. Google tells you to add a "new" domain in GSC when you just add http: to a http: domain you have registered already in GSC.

There are thousands of discussions about canonical 301 rewrite here you could read more in the Apache forum, here is one: [webmasterworld.com...]

[JorgeV]

Hello,

All this has nothing to do, with the issue of the OP. The problem is just that the domain name of his site, is too close from another site, and in the same industry. So, this is flagging his site has potential misleading.

I think there is nothing you can do about it. For some reasons, Google considers the other site, (without the hyphen) is more legitimate that your. This is why, it's important, to develop a brand with a unique identity. (name, design, etc...).

[mancunian]

Thank you for your feedback everybody.

This problem does not always happen but I think it just be when somebody is manually typing a web address similar to one previously visited? - not sure!

I am still working on a solution without changing the web address - seems very unfair for Chrome to treat our site this way when it is legitimate.

What is the best way to feedback directly to Google/ Chrome developers on this please?

[lammert]

Google Chrome sources its database of sites suspected of mimicking from the Google servers. Therefore the obvious way is to ask a site review through [developers.google.com...]

[mancunian]

Iammert thank you

[lucy24]

I think it just be when somebody is manually typing a web address similar to one previously visited

That sounds perilous. It implies that your site content really is similar to some other site, so there's a legitimate risk of confusion. Otherwise, the similarly named site wouldn't be in a significant number of users' browser history. (But why would someone type in a hyphen when they'd previously been to an unhyphenated site? The other way around seems more likely, especially if you're typing from memory. Maybe Chrome is programmed to react the same either way: ignore hyphens and see if there's a match.)

[Robert Charlton]

IMHO, the issue is not technical... it's legal... and IANAL... (and please forgive length and some repetition in this post.)

The website is 100% genuine. It does have a hyphen in the domain name which makes it similar to another website in the same industry.

Again... IANAL... but the question is not whether the website is genuine. It's whether you are "using an Internet domain name with bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else," to quote Wikpedia...

Perhaps also, in your situation, there's a question of whether someone has developed a plug-in or extension or whatever that flags similarity, history, and perceived intent... but IMO the flagging mechanism is not really the core issue. It's very possible, eg, that your intent is not really bad... but the similarity of terms used in the domain name were taking advantage of the reputation or name of another business in the same niche... and that has trademark implications beyond just your own situation.

Trademark law can be extremely contentious... and since you don't need to hold a trademark to buy a domain name, it's a very tricky area. Again, IANAL. It often comes down to how much money someone is willing to spend to defend their trademark name. While registration is not necessary for trademark protection, it helps. Often, similarity and prior use in the same industry is all that's necessary.

Note also that overly generic terms cannot be trademarked... so, while "cheap widgets" cannot be trademarked, "clicky-widgets" , eg, might be unique enough to be protected.

Again, prior use and prominence in the same industry, and willingness to defend that legally, will often suffice to afford trademark protection. The difficulty comes in because in many geo areas, domains are issued to anyone... not just to trademark holders. It's a contentious issue that Google stays extremely clear of.

As for resolution, I'd be careful about raising the issue if the other site and its reputation came before yours did... as they may be able to come after you if the name is contested... and in fact it's their obligation to do so if they want to protect their trademark. Again, IANAL.

The resolution process under ICANN is abbreviated to UDRP, and is described here in Wikipedia...

Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy
[en.wikipedia.org...]

When ICANN was first set up, one of the core tasks assigned to it was "The Trademark Dilemma",[2] the use of trade marks as domain names without the trademark owner's consent. By the late 1990s, such use was identified as problematic and likely to lead to consumers being misled. In the United Kingdom, the Court of Appeal described such domain names as "an instrument of fraud"

Again, you may be perfectly innocent of any evil intent... but the similarity of domains to trademarked names is a major international crime issue, so you've got a lot of baggage that's perhaps not yours to overcome.

[Robert Charlton]

PS: I should add that there may be a technical issue as well, essentially an auto-complete issue... which is more or less technically similar to spelling correction. Eg... if your name sounds like "John Jones" but you spell your version "Johan Jonez"... and you don't have a large number of links and citations from "reputable" sites establishing you (and thus the spelling of your name) as an independent entity, then Google and others will try to correct your perceived error. Essentially, it's a statistical determination. So, the hyphen issue may also be in effect a perceived spelling issue, FWIW.

The only thing that you can do is to become better known... and/or to get a name that's very distinct from someone else's name.

[mancunian]

Hey thanks for all the feedback... I have actually contacted the owner of the other website and they have the same problem as we have the other way round!

No legal issues here...we are more than happy with each other and the domain names ....just a poorly thought through idea from Chrome developers IMHO who are rightly so trying to fight the low life phishing crimnals but are also incorrectly marking innocent sites.

I think the impact is lower than I first thought as I don't think first time visitors see this message.