URL Spoof Issue in Search Results
-
Hello!
We could use some assistance diagnosing an issue. In order to avoid asking a convoluted question, I will try to break it down below:
1. A random foreign site is hacked and a subdirectory is added that is completely irrelevant to the root.
a). i.e. http://www.um.org/prom_dresses/
2. http://www.um.org/prom_dresses/ is just a phishing prom dress page
3. When you search "prom dress shop", the website that used to rank first (for good reason) was www.promdressshop.com.
4. www.promdressshop.com's home page has now been replaced by: um.org/prom_dresses/ – who is using prom dress shop's title tag and meta description.
How is it possible that this hacked page (on um.org) is not only ranking above us, but is also starting to replace www.promdressshop.com's pages in search results. We do not believe www.promdressshop.com has been hacked but are open to any ideas.
Please let me know if you would like any additional info. Thanks in advance!
-
Thank you for your response! We have combed through the code and server activity and there has been nothing changed recently (that we have noticed thus far). However, we will definitely keep you updated.
Thanks!
-
Thank you for the response! We have considered some of these angles but it has been tough to pinpoint the issue. It looks like our spam report took care of it for now but we will keep you guys updated. This is also happening to some competitors so we are all leaning toward this being a serious case of black hat SEO.
Thanks again!
-
Ok, so, my view on this.
In response to livecam's comment, __VIEWSTATE (the code he was refering too) is a base64 encoded form field used in ASP.net to hold data. Its probably not malicous in this instance. see this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1350216/what-does-the-viewstate-hold
For me, when i search "prom dress shop" in an incognito chrome window, i dont see either entry on the front page of google, though i expect this is because im searching from the UK.
Reviewing the pages specifically, i can make a couple of suggestions.
- Check your web.conf file, your main domain may have been hacked and this adjusted to send only search engine to um.org (to hide the hack)
- it may be that um.org has used Black Hat SEO technique's to massivly raise its profile, this will be short term as google will slap them with loads of penalties pretty quickly.
- Check your web server specifically for viruses etc. Being an ASP.net site, you'll be hosted on a windows server, running IIS. It will be just as prone to viruses as your windows PC at home (without the proper protection).
If you would like a hand to check your site code specifically, drop me a PM and we can see what we can do. Otherwise, if you have in house developers, they should be able to take a look.
-
Did you check page source codes of promdressshop.com ? When i check (ctrl+u) I see there is a large code structure. Usually this is not normal. This encrypted code and It may be embedded malicious code.
And search engines can be described this code as harmful.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Mobile Canonical Tag Issue
Hey so, For our site
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ggpaul562
we have the desktop version: www.site.com/product-name/product-code/ The mobile version www.site.com/mobile/product-name/product-code So...on the desktop version we'd have the following.. | | Now my question is, what do we do as far as canonicals on the actual mobile URL? Would it be this? | |
| | OR are we NOT supposed to have mobile canonical tags whatsoever since we've already added "rel alternate" ? Would like some clarificaiton. | | |0 -
Desktop vs. Mobile Results
When googling on www.google.ca for "wedding invitations" and in my own geo location market of Toronto, my site - www.stephita.com, will show up differently on SERP on desktop (Chrome & IE) vs. mobile (iPad, iPhone, android, etc.). On desktop SERP, I will show up 6/7 position... (which is relatively a new position, the past 3 weeks - I was previously on page 2) (After a bunch of SEO fixes, I've managed to propel my site back to page 1!) On mobile SERP, I only show up on 1/2 position on PAGE 2 😞 As I mentioned above, I did a bunch of SEO fixes that I think were related to Panda/Penguin algos. So I'm wondering why my MOBILE SERP has NOT improved along the way? What should I be looking at to fix this 5-6 position differential? Thanks all!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TysonWong0 -
Indexation of internal search results from infinite scroll
Hello, I have an issue where we will have a website set up with dynamic (AJAX) result pages based on the selection of certain filters chosen by the user. The result page will have 12 results shown and if the user scrolls down, the page will lazy load (infinite scroll) additional results. So for example, with these filters: Filter A: Size Filter B: Color Filter 😄 Location We could potentially have a page for "Large, Blue, New York" results dynamically generated. My issue is that I want Google to potentially crawl and index all these variations, so that I can have a page that ranks for "Large Blue New York", another page that ranks for "Small Orange Miami" etc. However, I do not need all the products indexed--- just the page with the first set of dynamic results would be enough since the additional products would just be more of the same. In other words, I am trying to get these pages with filters applied indexed and not necessarily get every possible product indexed. Can anyone comment on the best way to Get Google to index all dynamic variations? The proper way of paginating pages? Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Digi12340 -
Attack of the dummy urls -- what to do?
It occurs to me that a malicious program could set up thousands of links to dummy pages on a website: www.mysite.com/dynamicpage/dummy123 www.mysite.com/dynamicpage/dummy456 etc.. How is this normally handled? Does a developer have to look at all the parameters to see if they are valid and if not, automatically create a 301 redirect or 404 not found? This requires a table lookup of acceptable url parameters for all new visitors. I was thinking that bad url names would be rare so it would be ok to just stop the program with a message, until I realized someone could intentionally set up links to non existent pages on a site.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | friendoffood1 -
Lots of incorrect urls indexed - Googlebot found an extremely high number of URLs on your site
Hi, Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. Basically, our rankings and traffic etc have been dropping massively recently google sent us a message stating " Googlebot found an extremely high number of URLs on your site". This first highligted us to the problem that for some reason our eCommerce site has recently generated loads (potentially thousands) of rubbish urls hencing giving us duplication everywhere which google is obviously penalizing us with in the terms of rankings dropping etc etc. Our developer is trying to find the route cause of this but my concern is, How do we get rid of all these bogus urls ?. If we use GWT to remove urls it's going to take years. We have just amended our Robot txt file to exclude them going forward but they have already been indexed so I need to know do we put a redirect 301 on them and also a HTTP Code 404 to tell google they don't exist ? Do we also put a No Index on the pages or what . what is the best solution .? A couple of example of our problems are here : In Google type - site:bestathire.co.uk inurl:"br" You will see 107 results. This is one of many lot we need to get rid of. Also - site:bestathire.co.uk intitle:"All items from this hire company" Shows 25,300 indexed pages we need to get rid of Another thing to help tidy this mess up going forward is to improve on our pagination work. Our Site uses Rel=Next and Rel=Prev but no concanical. As a belt and braces approach, should we also put concanical tags on our category pages whereby there are more than 1 page. I was thinking of doing it on the Page 1 of our most important pages or the View all or both ?. Whats' the general consenus ? Any advice on both points greatly appreciated? thanks Sarah.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SarahCollins0 -
Duplicate content issue
Hi I installed a wiki and a forum to subdomains of one of my sites. The crawl report shows me duplicate content on the forum and on wiki. This will hurt the main site? Or the root domain? the site by the way is clean absolutely from errors. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nyanainc0 -
URL Shorteners. Are they SEO Friendly?
Do URL shortener services like bit.ly act as 301 redirects? I was thinking about utilizing one for longer query based URLs and didn't want to risk losing link juice. Thanks for the insight! Regards - Kyle
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kchandler0 -
Rel=Canonical URLs?
If I had two pages: PageA about Cats PageB about Dogs If PageA had a link rel=canonical to PageB, but the content is different, how would Google resolve this and what would users see if they searched "Cats" or "Dogs?" If PageA 301 redirected to PageB, (no content in PageA since it's 301 redirected), how would Google resolve this and what would users see if they searched "Cats" or "Dogs?"
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | visionnexus0