From My Spammers Toolbox Collection!
Posted 03 July 2006 - 10:36 PM
Posted 03 July 2006 - 11:22 PM
Posted 04 July 2006 - 12:15 AM
img src=xyz1234.gif onerror="str=unescape('d%6fcument%2el%6fc%61ti%6fn%3d%22'+ 'http://casino.take-d...-blackjack.html' + '%22'); eval(str);"
In your example www dot vip-viagra dot biz slash roby slash robi_index.html what was the original page.
They are getting more devious.
I realize that the porn and gambling sites are huge business but do people fall for these redirects.
Edited by bobbb, 04 July 2006 - 12:17 AM.
Posted 05 July 2006 - 11:31 PM
Posted 07 July 2006 - 12:50 PM
Google is better off spending their time devaluing these sites based on their poor content. I believe that's what's going on anyway. Analyzing copy for quality is a better and more attainable target IMO, but I'm not an expert here.
Does the site RANK well?
Edited by SEOEgghead, 07 July 2006 - 12:52 PM.
Posted 07 July 2006 - 01:09 PM
Edited by SEOEgghead, 07 July 2006 - 01:19 PM.
Posted 07 July 2006 - 02:09 PM
There is no way an algorithm could detect every clever implementation of a spam redirect IMO.
PS Afterall they claim to be know-alls so easily. See this post about phishing!
Posted 07 July 2006 - 03:12 PM
What most people don't consider is: although this can be pulled from Google's index via their filters, algos, etc.... the traffic from Yahoo and MSN alone can be equally appealing (which combined is approximately the same traffic Google will produce).
Such redirects are not taken well by Google.
Sooner or later site will de-indexed.
Check out the screenshots I took
Edited by phaithful, 07 July 2006 - 03:13 PM.
Posted 08 July 2006 - 02:03 AM
And I suspect the text on the page is only filler.
"But he played a dramatically different role: While bin Laden was the hidden leader, issuing statements from hiding in Pakistan's border region with Afghanistan, al-Zarqawi portrayed himself as the warrior on the front lines."
Posted 08 July 2006 - 08:18 PM
Probably no effort at all since he probably used an automated tool.
Do that for a few hundred or a few thousand keyword phrase and you've got your self some decent traffic for almost no effort at all.
Posted 09 July 2006 - 01:17 AM
Maybe the engines ignore casino sites? I checked around last night and it looks like a lot of blogs are being used to promote gambling but most I saw just have a clickable image or 2.
Posted 09 July 2006 - 02:45 AM
The reason for the ruse is to leverage the blogspot.com domain.
Yahoo and MSN don't know and don't care about some no name casino site. However, they do perceive blogspot.com as a well known and highly link to site. Since Yahoo and MSN are still very easily prone to subdomain spam the blogspot page can more easily rank well than "no name casino site".
Now Google is still also prone to subdomain spam, but they are aware of the exploitations of blogger / blogspot so they smartly filter out content 1 paged blogs such as this.
Of course, this is all speculation since I don't work at any of the 3 search engines and since I don't know what the algorithms say. But from experience and simple piecing together... this is one highly plausible conclusion in my opinion.
Edited by phaithful, 09 July 2006 - 02:45 AM.
Posted 11 July 2006 - 02:39 PM
Now of course, many webmasters are, in my view, over-estimating the amount of usage data being used, but this is certainly possible, and we do know for sure that Alexa data has been used by at least one of the most major engines before.
Anyone addicted to the green pixie dust. The only way to get the PR data for a page visited is to ask for it, giving the URL to Google in that request. Any toolbar or extension or widget that shows the PR of each page vsited is automatically sending the url of each page visited to Google.
How many people actually permit Google to mine data like that, though
Posted 11 July 2006 - 06:45 PM
Anyway, it's an interesting approach, because it's using the (free) computational resources of a large number of users, which gives it a high degree of confidence.
I can think of a few loopholes, and I was only addressing on-page factors in my blog entry, but using that sort of data is a powerful approach.
It also scares me
Edited by SEOEgghead, 11 July 2006 - 06:46 PM.
Posted 11 July 2006 - 07:05 PM
Its just time / resource consuming, and risky as the only sure fired way is to visit the page and run the code......
But google has the money to buy enough resources to make the time issue go away, and to deal with the security also. They just dont want to solve the problem in my opinion.
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users