Google indexing https sites by default now, where's the Moz blog about it!
-
Hello and good morning / happy Friday!
Last night an article from of all places " Venture Beat " titled " Google Search starts indexing and letting users stream Android apps without matching web content " was sent to me, as I read this I got a bit giddy. Since we had just implemented a full sitewide https cert rather than a cart only ssl.
I then quickly searched for other sources to see if this was indeed true, and the writing on the walls seems to indicate so.
Google - Google Webmaster Blog! - http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.in/2015/12/indexing-https-pages-by-default.html
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-to-prioritize-the-indexing-of-https-pages/147179/
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/google-indexing-https-by-default,30781.html
https://hacked.com/google-will-begin-indexing-httpsencrypted-pages-default/
https://www.seroundtable.com/google-app-indexing-documentation-updated-21345.html
I found it a bit ironic to read about this on mostly unsecured sites.
I wanted to hear about the 8 keypoint rules that google will factor in when ranking / indexing https pages from now on, and see what you all felt about this.
Google will now begin to index HTTPS equivalents of HTTP web pages, even when the former don’t have any links to them. However, Google will only index an HTTPS URL if it follows these conditions:
- It doesn’t contain insecure dependencies.
- It isn’t blocked from crawling by robots.txt.
- It doesn’t redirect users to or through an insecure HTTP page.
- It doesn’t have a rel="canonical" link to the HTTP page.
- It doesn’t contain a noindex robots meta tag.
- It doesn’t have on-host outlinks to HTTP URLs.
- The sitemaps lists the HTTPS URL, or doesn’t list the HTTP version of the URL.
- The server has a valid TLS certificate.
One rule that confuses me a bit is :
- **It doesn’t redirect users to or through an insecure HTTP page. **
Does this mean if you just moved over to https from http your site won't pick up the https boost? Since most sites in general have http redirects to https?
Thank you!
-
Can you please make a concrete example of a key-word for that you do not rank nicely. Please also specify the thing which in your opinion need to appear nicely inside the serch and the object for the blog of nextgenapk .
-
Thanks for your response, Peter! As I said, I could be totally wrong - glad I asked this question
Cheers!
-
-
_"Or you can leave but change their links to pass some URL shortener - bit.ly or t.co until they comes with HTTPS version." _
looking at it from technical standpoint, these shortners are also not https (when crawling. Would they not have the same effect as other non https links?
Sorry, I could be going totally wrong about this and this question doesnt make sense at all.
-
Touche, good sir, these are certainly some great ways to go about this. Especially number 3.
Thanks!
Wonder how long we got until http2 implementation...
-
Or you can leave but change their links to pass some URL shortener - bit.ly or t.co until they comes with HTTPS version.
Or you can also make some page as "partners" where you can link only HTTP external sites.
Or you can also make internal page redirector to HTTP site. Like HTTPS -> HTTPS (inside redirector and dummy page) -> HTTP. On this case redirector won't be indexed and that's why it's dummy.
And this is just three ideas that i think for one minute. Probably mine favorite is #3. But it's IMHO.
-
So if my manufacturers don't have https sites, I should remove the links to them since it's going to hinder indexing?
Thanks for the http redirecting to https response.
-
Some sites comes with redirectors or "beacons" for detecting user presence. Example i'm on site X page A and there i click on link to go on page B. But due marketing department this pass via HTTP redirector or pure HTTP (and there 301 redirect to HTTPS). Then this page B can be not indexed.
This mean that once you set sitewide 301 redirect to encrypted connection you must make few more steps:
- you must check all resources to pass via this encrypted channel. Images, CSS, JS - just anything.
- you must check canonical to be set to HTTPS
- you must check that link between pages to be also HTTPS
- you must see any 3rd party tools for encrypted connection. Can be analytics software or "tracking pixels" or heat maps or ads.
- you must check if outgoing links from your site can be via other sites with encryption. Can be Wikipedia, Moz, Google. Since everything there is already encrypted you will skip frustrating HTTPS -> HTTP -> HTTPS jump too.
So then your site can be indexed in HTTPS. It's tricky procedure with many traps.
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
-
If we have all products on-site for indexing, do we get dinged by Google for not transacting on-site?
I am trying to do research on the SEO impact of having an off-site transactional website. For example, Pepsi.com lists all product information on their site but guides visitors to transact on Amazon or Walmart. What impact, if any, does guiding the customer to a separate transactional site have on SEO? In short, if we have all products on-site for indexing, do we get dinged by Google for not transacting on-site?
Algorithm Updates | | KaylaV0 -
Google SERPs showing blog comments in Answer Box?
I was recently researching Schema markup for local businesses and I was presented with an Answer Box that used blog comments as answers (at least I feel that's what they were attempting to show). This is what is says currently when I search for "schema markup hours" (screenshot also attached): 12 thoughts on “How to Use Schema Markup for Local SEO” Lauren says: March 11, 2013 at 2:22 pm. ... souleye says: March 11, 2013 at 3:29 pm. ... Daniel Bennett says: March 11, 2013 at 8:51 pm. ... sammy. says: ... Nathan says: March 11, 2013 at 11:53 pm. ... Rishav says: March 12, 2013 at 5:51 am. ... Paul Sherland says: ... keyword removed says: Right now it shows the time and date of the comment, but is this something that's new or has it been around? Thanks in advance! tp5y1od.png
Algorithm Updates | | TomBinga11250 -
Bing not indexing pages
We have taken all recommended steps to index our site sitegeek.com pages to Bing Bot but failed to index them. Bing bot crawled more than 5,000 pages every day but strange why pages are not getting index ? if we query site:sitegeek.com in Bing Bing Search Engine shows only 1,200 pages got indexed. but we query site:sitegeek.com in Google Google Search Engine show more 546,000 pages got indexed. For example : https://www.sitegeek.com/000webhost Above page crawled by Google but Bing. Can anyone suggest what we are missing on this page? what need to change to index such pages? Thanks! Rajiv
Algorithm Updates | | gamesecure0 -
Republish An Updated Blog or not?
We need to update one of our older posts (a new federal ruling came down that now applies) but do I just update it or should I republish it? I know that just republishing something that hasn't been changed, can get you flagged, but if it's an update, I would think that would be appropriate to republish. I'd just like some guidance before I proceed. Thanks and Happy Friday! Ruben
Algorithm Updates | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Would Google Remove Pages for Inactivity?
Hi, I've been watching the Total Indexed number for 4 domains that I work with for the last few months. In Google Webmaster Tools three of them were holding steady up until August-September, when suddenly they started declining by hundreds of thousands of URLs a week. I've asked my IT department and they say they haven't done anything technically different in the last few months that would affect indexation. I've also searched on google and on search marketing blogs to see if anyone else has experience this to no avail. As you can see in the image, the "Not Selected" pages have not increased so it appears this is not due to duplicate content (of which we have a lot). However, the "Ever Crawled" number is increasing. The only reasonable answer that I can conclude is that Google is now de-indexing inactive URLs? Anyone have a better answer? yIYDm.jpg
Algorithm Updates | | OfficeFurn0 -
With Google's Location Based Searches, Should I Include a City Name with My Keywords?
What I mean is when you search on Google it seems to pull information by your location so would it be helpful including the city name + keyword still for SEO or would it be just as helpful using just the keyword? For example, a client is in Alexandria, VA and has a computer repair shop so would "Alexandria computer repair" be as good or better than "computer repair"? Just a little curious. Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | CodyOelker-AMICreativeStudio2 -
Large site with faceted navigation using rel=canonical, but Google still has issues
First off, I just wanted to mention I did post this on one other forum so I hope that is not completely against the rules here or anything. Just trying to get an idea from some of the pros at both sources. Hope this is received well. Now for the question..... "Googlebot found an extremely high number of URLs on your site:" Gotta love these messages in GWT. Anyway, I wanted to get some other opinions here so if anyone has experienced something similar or has any recommendations I would love to hear them. First off, the site is very large and utilizes faceted navigation to help visitors sift through results. I have implemented rel=canonical for many months now to have each page url that is created based on the faceted nav filters, push back to the main category page. However, I still get these damn messages from Google every month or so saying that they found too many pages on the site. My main concern obviously is wasting crawler time on all these pages that I am trying to do what they ask in these instances and tell them to ignore and find the content on page x. So at this point I am thinking about possibly using robots.txt file to handle these, but wanted to see what others around here thought before I dive into this arduous task. Plus I am a little ticked off that Google is not following a standard they helped bring to the table. Thanks for those who take the time to respond in advance.
Algorithm Updates | | PeteGregory0 -
Does Google index Wordpress pages with frames
Does Google or other search engines index Wordpress pages that use frames? Here is the site in question: http://www.source-nutrition.com/son/
Algorithm Updates | | BradBorst0