Blocking https from being crawled
-
I have an ecommerce site where https is being crawled for some pages. Wondering if the below solution will fix the issue
www.example.com will be my domain
In the nav there is a login page www.example.com/login which is redirecting to the https://www.example.com/login
If I just disallowed /login in the robots file wouldn't it not follow the redirect and index that stuff?
The redirect part is what I am questioning.
-
Correct once /login gets redirected to https://www.example.com/login all nav links etc are https
What I ended up doing was blocking /login in robots and now doing canonicals on https as well as nofollow the /login link that is in the nav that redirects
Willl see what happens now.
-
So, the "/login" page gets redirected to https: and then every link on that page goes secure and Google crawls them all? I think blocking the "/login" page is a perfectly good way to go here - cut the crawl path, and you'll cut most of the problem.
You could request removal of "/login" in Google Webmaster Tools, too. Sometimes, I find that Robots.txt isn't great at removing pages that are already indexed. I would definitely add the canonical as well, if it's feasible. Cutting the path may not cut the pages that have already been indexed with https:.
Sorry, I'd actually reverse that:
(1) Add the canonicals, and let Google sweep up the duplicates
(2) A few weeks later, block the "/login" page
Sounds counter-intuitive, but if you block the crawl path to the https: pages first, then Google won't crawl the canonical tags on those versions. Use canonical to clean up the index, and then block the page to prevent future problems.
-
Gotcha. Yea I commented above how I was going to add a canonical as well as a noindex in the meta but was curious how it handled the redirect that was happening.
thanks for your help
-
Yea I was going to nofollow the link in the nav and add a meta tag but was curious how the robots file would handle this since the url is a redirect.
Thanks for your input
-
The pages that are being crawled under https, are the same pages available under http as well ? If yes, can you just add a canonical tag on these pages to go to the http version. That should fix it. And if your login page is the entry point, your fix will help as well. But then as Rebekah said, what if somebody is linking to your https page. I would suggest you look into making a canonical tag on these pages to http if that makes sense and is doable.
-
You can disallow the https portion in robots.txt, but remember robots.txt isn't always a sure fire way of not getting an area of your site crawled. If you have other important content to crawl from the secured page, be careful you are not blocking robots from there.
If this is linked to other places on the web, and the link doesn't include no-follow, search engines may still crawl the page. Can you change the link in your navigation to no-follow as well? I would also add a meta noindex tag to the page itself, and a canonical tag to the https version.
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
-
Website crawl error
Hi all, When I try to crawl a website, I got next error message: "java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Illegal cookie name" For the moment, I found next explanation: The errors indicate that one of the web servers within the same cookie domain as the server is setting a cookie for your domain with the name "path", as well as another cookie with the name "domain" Does anyone has experience with this problem, knows what it means and knows how to solve it? Thanks in advance! Jens
Technical SEO | | WeAreDigital_BE0 -
Google Crawling Issues! How Can I Get Google to Crawl My Website Regularly?
Hi Everyone! My website is not being crawled regularly by Google - there are weeks when it's regular but for the past month or so it does not get crawled for seven to eight days. There are some specific pages, that I want to get ranked but they of late are not being crawled AT ALL unless I use the 'Fetch As Google' tool! That's not normal, right? I have checked and re-checked the on-page metrics for these pages (and the website as a whole, backlinking is a regular and ongoing process as well! Sitemap is in place too! Resubmitted it once too! This issue is detrimental to website traffic and rankings! Would really appreciate insights from you guys! Thanks a lot!
Technical SEO | | farhanm1 -
Google has deindexed 40% of my site because it's having problems crawling it
Hi Last week i got my fifth email saying 'Google can't access your site'. The first one i got in early November. Since then my site has gone from almost 80k pages indexed to less than 45k pages and the number is lowering even though we post daily about 100 new articles (it's a online newspaper). The site i'm talking about is http://www.gazetaexpress.com/ We have to deal with DDoS attacks most of the time, so our server guy has implemented a firewall to protect the site from these attacks. We suspect that it's the firewall that is blocking google bots to crawl and index our site. But then things get more interesting, some parts of the site are being crawled regularly and some others not at all. If the firewall was to stop google bots from crawling the site, why some parts of the site are being crawled with no problems and others aren't? In the screenshot attached to this post you will see how Google Webmasters is reporting these errors. In this link, it says that if 'Error' status happens again you should contact Google Webmaster support because something is preventing Google to fetch the site. I used the Feedback form in Google Webmasters to report this error about two months ago but haven't heard from them. Did i use the wrong form to contact them, if yes how can i reach them and tell about my problem? If you need more details feel free to ask. I will appreciate any help. Thank you in advance C43svbv.png?1
Technical SEO | | Bajram.Kurtishaj1 -
Site blocked by robots.txt and 301 redirected still in SERPs
I have a vanity URL domain that 301 redirects to my main site. That domain does have a robots.txt to disallow the entire site as well. However, for a branded enough search that vanity domain still shows up in SERPs and has the new Google message of: A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt I get why the message is there - that's not my , my question is shouldn't a 301 redirect trump this domain showing in SERPs, ever? Client isn't happy about it showing at all. How can I get the vanity domain out of the SERPs? THANKS in advance!
Technical SEO | | VMLYRDiscoverability0 -
Block Baidu crawler?
Hello! One of our websites receives a large amount of traffic from the Baidu crawler. We do not have any Chinese content or do any business with China since our market is Uk. Is it a good idea to block the Baidu crawler in the robots.txt or could it have any adverse effects on SEO of our site? What do you suggest?
Technical SEO | | AJPro0 -
Does having a page (or site) available on HTTP and HTTPS cause duplication issues?
Say I've got a site that can be accessed using either protocal (i.e. HTTP and HTTPS), but most (if not all of the links) are pointing to the HTTP versions. Will it cause a problem if I start link building to HTTPS versions? In other words does google see http://mysite.com as the same page as https://mysite.com? Thanks
Technical SEO | | PeterAlexLeigh0 -
Is blocking RSS Feeds with robots.txt necessary?
Is it necessary to block an rss feed with robots.txt? It seems they are automatically not indexed (http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/12/taking-feeds-out-of-our-web-search.html) And, google says here that it's important not to block RSS feeds (http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/10/using-rssatom-feeds-to-discover-new.html) I'm just checking!
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
False Negative Warnings with Crawl Diagnostic Test
Ok... I will try to explain as clear as possible. This issue is regarding close to 5000 'Warnings' from our most recent seomoz pro crawl diagnostic test. The top three warnings have about 6000 instances among them: : 1. Duplicate Page Title 2. Duplicate Page Content 3. 302 (Temporary Redirect) We understand that duplicate titles and content are "no-no's" and have made it top priority to avoid duplication on any level. Here is the issue lies... we are using the Volusion eCommerce solution and they have a variety of value add shopping features such as "Email A Friend" and "Email Me When Back In-Stock" on each product page. If one of these options is clicked, you are then directed to the appropriate page. Now each page has a different url with the sole variable of each individual product code. But with it being a part of Volusion's ingrained functionality... the META title is the same for each page. It takes from the title of our store homepage. Example below: Online Beauty Supply Store | Hair Care Products | Nail Care | Flat Irons http://www.beautystoponline.com/Email_Me_When_Back_In_Stock.asp?ProductCode=AN1PRO7130 Online Beauty Supply Store | Hair Care Products | Nail Care | Flat Irons http://www.beautystoponline.com/Email_Me_When_Back_In_Stock.asp?ProductCode=BI8BIOSI34 The same goes for the duplicate content warnings. If you click on one of these features, it directs you to a page with pretty much the same content except for different product. Basically each page has both duplicate content and duplicate title. SEOMOZ description is Duplicate Title: Content that is identical (or nearly identical) to content on other pages of your site forces your pages to unnecessarily compete with each other for rankings. Duplicate Page Content: You should use unique titles for your different pages to ensure that they describe each page uniquely and don't compete with each other for keyword relevance. Because I know SEO is not an exact science, the question here is does Google recognize that although they are duplicates, it actually is generated from a feature that makes us even more of a legitimate eCommerce site? Or, from seomoz description, if duplication is bad only because you do not want your pages to be competing with each other... should I not worry because i could care less if these pages don't get traffic. Or does it effect my domain authority as whole? Then as for a solution. I am still trying to work out with Volusion how we can change the META title of the pages. It's highly unlikely but we'll see. As for the duplicate content, there is no way to change one of these pages. It's hard coded. Solution... so if it is bad (even though it shouldn't be) would it be worth it to disable these features. I hope not. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of Google trying to provide the most legitimate, value add sites to searchers? As for the 302 (Temporary Redirect) warning... this is only appearing on all of our shopping cart pages. Such as the "Email A Friend" feature, there is a page for every product. For example: http://www.beautystoponline.com/ShoppingCart.asp?ProductCode=AN1HOM8040 http://www.beautystoponline.com/ShoppingCart.asp?ProductCode=AN1HOM8050 The description semoz provides is: 302 (Temporary Redirect): Using a 302 redirect will cause search engine crawlers to treat the redirect as temporary and not pass any link juice (ranking power). We highly recommend that you replace 302 redirects with 301 redirects. So the probably solution... I do have the ability to change to a 301 redirect but do I want to do this for my shopping cart? Does Google realize the dead end is legitimate? Or... does it matter if link juice is passed through my shopping cart? And again, does it impact my site as a whole? It is greatly appreciated if anyone could help me out with this stuff 🙂 Thank you
Technical SEO | | anthonyjamesent1