User Agent -teracent-feed-processing
-
Does anyone knows some info about "teracent-feed-processing" user agent?
IP's from which user agent reside: 74.125.113.145, 74.125.113.148, 74.125.187.84 ....
In our logs, 2 out of 3 requests are made by it, causing server crash.
-
It seems that the Sudden drop in indexed pages reported in WMT might relate to some reporting issues from Google - https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/webmasters/qkvudy6VqnM;context-place=topicsearchin/webmasters/sitemap|sort:date
-
Since "teracent-feed-processing" didn't followed the rules in robots.txt, we had to hard-block it. If server detects the user agent beeing "teracent-feed-processing" it will drop the connection: _ (104) Connection reset by peer_
-
Well it isn't Googlebot and it isn't one I have come across before. Don't forget that any user agent can be spoofed very easily so I wouldn't worry about blocking it.
**Should I assume that the drop in reported indexed pages is a result of blocking the teracent-feed-processing user agent? **
I really don't think that this is Google. The only one they have is Googlebot, and tell you this is the one to add if you wish to block them.
Just a thought, can you share your robots.txt file just to make sure pages aren't being unintentionally blocked?
-Andy
-
It seems that "teracent-feed-processing" user agent is somehow linked to Google. If you analyse the Ip's , you'll noticed that are Google owned. Teracent company has been bought by Google in 2009.
btw - we've already blocked it, but I'm trying to figure it out what's the key role played by this user agent. We've also noticed a drastic decline in number of pages being reported in Google Webmaster Tools (half of what we used to have). Should I assume that the drop in reported indexed pages is a result of blocking the teracent-feed-processing user agent?
-
It sounds like your typical spammy site so I would suggest just blocking them. Add the following to the top of your robots.txt file:
**User-agent: teracent-feed-processing** **Disallow: /** However, before you go live with this, use the webmaster tools Robots.txt tester to make sure everything else still gets crawled. -Andy
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
-
What's the best way for users to upload their images to my wordpress site to promote UGC
I have looked at lots of different plugins and wanted a recommendation for an easy way for patients of ours to upload pictures of them out partying and having fun and looking beautiful so future users can see the final results instead of sometimes gory or difficult to understand before and after images. I'd like to give them the opportunity to write captions (like facebook or insta posts and would offer them incentives to do so. I don't want it to be too complicated for them or have too many steps or barriers but I do want it to look nice and slick and modern. Also do you think this would have a positive impact on SEO? I was also thinking of a Q&A app where dentists could get Q&A emails and respond - i've been doing AMA sessions and they've been really successful and I would like to bring it into out site and make it native. Thanks in advance 🙂
Technical SEO | | Smileworks_Liverpool1 -
Will redirecting a logged in user from a public page to an equivalent private page (not visible to google) impact SEO?
Hi, We have public pages that can obviously be visited by our registered members. When they visit these public pages + they are logged in to our site, we want to redirect them to the equivalent (richer) page on the private site e.g. a logged in user visiting /public/contentA will be redirected to /private/contentA Note: Our /public pages are indexed by Google whereas /private pages are excluded. a) will this affect our SEO? b) if not, is 302 the best http status code to use? Cheers
Technical SEO | | bernienabo0 -
Different URLs for signed in and signed out users
Hello, I have a client that plans to use different URLs for signed in and signed out customers. My concern is that signed in and signed out customers will provide back links to different URLs of the same page and thus split page rank. I'm assuimg the URL for signed in customers won't be fetched by Google and therefore rule out canonicalizing the signed in URL to the signed out version. The solution for me would be to ensure that there is only one URL for each content page, and to instead use cookies to prompt customers to sign up to the service that aren’t already a customer. However, please correct me if I’m wrong in my assumptions. Thanks
Technical SEO | | SEONOW1230 -
How do I direct users to site page when they search vanity URL?
My company runs a contest via a landing page on our website. The full URL to the landing page is rather long so we have a vanity URL that we use for advertising purposes. I have a 301 on the vanity URL to the landing page URL so people visiting it directly end up where they should just fine. But if a user goes to Google and types the vanity URL into the search bar, the landing page is nowhere to be found in the results. What do I need to do to get the landing page to show in results when people search the vanity URL?
Technical SEO | | jarjarjarvis0 -
HTTP Vary:User-Agent Server or Page Level?
Looking for any insights regarding the usage of the Vary HTTP Header. Mainly around the idea that search engines will not like having a Vary HTTP Header on pages that don't have a mobile version, which means the header will be to be implemented on a page-by-page basis. Additionally, does anyone has experience with the usage of the Vary HTTP Header and CDNs like Akamai?Google still recommends using the header, even though it can present some challenges with CDNs. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | burnseo0 -
User Reviews Question
On my e-commerce site, I have user reviews that cycle in the header section of my category pages. They appear/cycle via a snippet of code that the review program provided me with. My question is...b/c the actual user-generated content is not in the page content does the google-bot not see this content? Does it not treat the page as having fresh content even though the reviews are new? Does the bot only see the code that provides the reviews? Thanks in advance. Hopefully this question is clear enough.
Technical SEO | | IOSC0 -
Different version of site for "users" who don't accept cookies considered cloaking?
Hi I've got a client with lots of content that is hidden behind a registration form - if you don't fill it out you can not proceed to the content. As a result it is not being indexed. No surprises there. They are only doing this because they feel it is the best way of capturing email addresses, rather than the fact that they need to "protect" the content. Currently users arriving on the site will be redirected to the form if they have not had a "this user is registered" cookie set previously. If the cookie is set then they aren't redirected and get to see the content. I am considering changing this logic to only redirecting users to the form if they accept cookies but haven't got the "this user is registered cookie". The idea being that search engines would then not be redirected and would index the full site, not the dead end form. From the clients perspective this would mean only very free non-registered visitors would "avoid" the form, yet search engines are arguably not being treated as a special case. So my question is: would this be considered cloaking/put the site at risk in any way? (They would prefer to not go down the First Click Free route as this will lower their email sign-ups.) Thank you!
Technical SEO | | TimBarlow0 -
On page optimisation: Good for the users and engines?
I would like to rank for words as:
Technical SEO | | madsurfer
windsurfing equipment
windsurfing news
windsurfing sails
windsurfing boards etc. Now am I wondering if I should use exact those words in the navigation/titles/descriptions because it seems not user friendly. The whole website is about windsurfing thus naming it just “equipement” instead of “windsurfing equipment” would be clear to a visitor that I am talking about that windsurfing related topic. Here is an example: http://madwindsurfing.com/cat/competitions-events/
I can even change the URL to http://madwindsurfing.com/cat/windsurfing-competitions-events/ What would be the best way of choosing the naming/descriptions when I do on-page optimisation which is good for the engines and for the users and who would you do in my case?0
