Black Hat Attack! Seeking Help
-
Hello,
For the first time, I think my site has been the victim of a black hat (spam) attack
I have a blog in a competitive niche and my rankings suddenly dropped (from top 3 to top 20). A quick peek at my latest backlinks using Open Site Explorer "Just Discovered" revealed some nasty looking comment spam links with my target keywords posted recently.
Of course, I haven't hired anyone to post such links and I haven't done it myself. So my only guess is that a competitor has been generous enough to invest on spamming my site.
Questions:
1. How can I confirm if this is in fact a spam attack?
2. Should I worry about this?
3. If so, what is the best way to go about this?
Would appreciate any thoughts on this.
Thanks in advance!
Howard
-
Thanks so much! I'll have a look at issues with respect to the Panda update and I'll see if I find anything there.
-
Oh, and I wanted to add info on my other traffic drop audit client who had the mystery nofollowed anchor texted links pointing to their site. Their traffic drop ended up being because of abuse of the local listing. At this point I don't think that the mystery links were significant. But, if anyone else knows why these would appear, I'd love to hear it.
-
The blog comment links on the page you mentioned are nofollowed so these really shouldn't harm your site.
I had a client recently that had a pile of mystery nofollowed links that had their keyword as anchor text and I really couldn't figure out where they came from. When I looked at the links to their site sorted by only followed links there were no unusual ones there. I never did figure out where they came from.
The way I understand it, if someone was trying to negative SEO you then any possible penalty would not affect your site until either Penguin refreshes or until Google does a manual review of the site. In your case, Penguin has not refreshed since October so this is not the issue. You would know if you had a manual penalty because you would have a warning in WMT. btw...there's no point filing for reconsideration if you don't have a manual warning in WMT.
If your drop happened at that time in March I would have a very close look for Panda issues on your site as this is more likely in my mind.
I suppose there is probably no harm in disavowing the links as long as you are comfortable with what you are doing with the disavow tool. But I would be surprised if it would make any difference.
-
Thanks for your suggestion. The site owners could probably care less about removing those links but I'll definitely use the disavow tool followed by a reconsideration request.
-
Care to share any of the nasty links? In my experience the vast majority of the time when someone thinks they have been negatively SEO'd they are either seeing just regular normal scraper type sites that link to EVERYONE such as SEO profile sites or domain info sites, or they are seeing links that are the result of previous spammy linkbuilding tactics. An example of this could be if you submitted your site to a spammy directory and then all of a sudden that directory gets scraped by several other directories and boom...you've got a pile of links that you didn't personally create.
I would think that it's unlikely that a drop from top 3 to top 20 at this point would be because of a negative SEO campaign because in order for you to be penalized for bad links there would have had to have been a Penguin refresh (which there wasn't) or you would have received a manual spam warning in WMT.
If the drop happened around Mar 13-15 then there was a Panda refresh around that time, so that could be it.
-
Hi Howard, I think the best thing is to prioritize and contact all the sites in bulk to have those comments removed. If they don't answer disavow those urls, Then write arecon request to google to ask them to remove any penalty they put upon you because you were victim of some kind of negative seo attack. After having your rankings fixed try to understand from where that attack may be arrived although I don't think you'll find anything since the attack wasn't on your site
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
-
Seeking Site Feedback
Hello everyone! Hope you are all doing well. Long story short, I'm currently in the 30-day trial period for Moz Pro and I'm taking advantage of running a campaign for my (currently) one-man SEO/Digital Marketing company. Recently built my site using Divi. Filled out all the SEO information through the Yoast SEO plugin, tied Google Analytics, etc... Seeking feedback on the visuals of the website and whether you have any feedback on link-building in order to bring in more traffic to the site. http://fourpeaksseo.com Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Four-Peaks-SEO0 -
White hat or black hat?
There seems to be very differing opinions on what is good practice (white hat) and what is not (Black hat) and I'm not sure which way to lean (although my inclinations are slightly to the white). I'm starting a business offering a service and see ranking position 1-3 in the serps as my key to success. I'm creating good and useful content on my site and without much effort beyond on page seo have reached page 4 google for a few choice keywords. I feel that with a small number of links to a few of my pages i can reach page 1 and here is where my dilemma begins. With a bit of investment in some software (£400-600 for 3 different products) I can start Tiered linkbuilding (in a black hat way) and get results quickly but potentially risking my site in the eyes of google. I've been doing a little outreach to gain links in a whiter way but not had much success yet. I'm keen to keep with the whiter side but see progress as slower. Am I wrong? Can i build a robust link profile in a white hat way rapidly? Are there any quick wins i can gain to give me confidence? Why is white hat better than black hat? All wisdom, experience, guidance and humour gratefully received.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | roadhaulageservices0 -
Recovering from Black Hat/Negative SEO with a twist
Hey everyone, This is a first for me, I'm wondering if anyone has experienced a similar situation and if so, what the best course of action was for you. Scenario In the process of designing a new site for a client, we discovered that his previous site, although having decent page rank and traffic had been hacked. The site was built on Wordpress so it's likely there was a vulnerability somewhere that allowed someone to create loads of dynamic pages; www.domain.com/?id=102, ?id=103, ?id=104 and so on. These dynamic pages ended up being malware with a trojan horse our servers recognized and subsequently blocked access to. We have since helped them remedy the vulnerability and remove the malware that was creating these crappy dynamic pages. Another automated program appears to have been recently blasting spam links (mostly comment spam and directory links) to these dynamically created pages at an incredibly rapid rate, and is still actively doing so. Right now we're looking at a small business website with a touch over 500k low-quality spammy links pointing to malware pages from the previously compromised site. Important: As of right now, there's been no manual penalty on the site, nor has a "This Site May Have Been Compromised" marker in the organic search results for the site. We were able to discover this before things got too bad for them. Next Steps? The concern is that when the Penguin refresh occurs, Google is going to notice all these garbage links pointing to those malware pages and then potentially slap a penalty on the site. The main questions I have are: Should we report this proactively to the web spam team using the guidelines here? (https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport?hl=en&pli=1) Should we request a malware review as recommended within the same guidelines, keeping in mind the site hasn't been given a 'hacked' snippet in the search results? (https://support.google.com/webmasters/topic/4598410?hl=en&ref_topic=4596795) Is submitting a massive disavow links file right now, including the 490k-something domains, the only way we can escape the wrath of Google when these links are discovered? Is it too hopeful to imagine their algorithm will detect the negative-SEO nature of these links and not give them any credit? Would love some input or examples from anyone who can help, thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Etna0 -
Cloaking for better user experience and deeper indexing - grey or black?
I'm working on a directory that has around 800 results (image rich results) in the top level view. This will likely grow over time so needs support thousands. The main issue is that it is built in ajax so paginated pages are dynamically generated and look like duplicate content to search engines. If we limit the results, then not all of the individual directory listing pages can be found. I have an idea that serves users and search engines what they want but uses cloaking. Is it grey or black? I've read http://moz.com/blog/white-hat-cloaking-it-exists-its-permitted-its-useful and none of the examples quite apply. To allow users to browse through the results (without having a single page that has a slow load time) we include pagination links but which are not shown to search engines. This is a positive user experience. For search engines we display all results (since there is no limit the number of links so long as they are not spammy) on a single page. This requires cloaking, but is ultimately serving the same content in slightly different ways. 1. Where on the scale of white to black is this? 2. Would you do this for a client's site? 3. Would you do it for your own site?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ServiceCrowd_AU0 -
Black Hat SEO Case Study - Private Link Network - How is this still working?
I have been studying my competitor's link building strategies and one guy (affiliate) in particular really caught my attention. He has been using a strategy that has been working really well for the past six months or so. How well? He owns about 80% of search results for highly competitive keywords, in multiple industries, that add up to about 200,000 searches per month in total. As far as I can tell it's a private link network. Using Ahref and Open Site Explorer, I found out that he owns 1000s of bought domains, all linking to his sites. Recently, all he's been doing is essentially buying high pr domains, redesigning the site and adding new content to rank for his keywords. I reported his link-wheel scheme to Google and posted a message on the webmaster forum - no luck there. So I'm wondering how is he getting away with this? Isn't Google's algorithm sophisticated enough to catch something as obvious as this? Everyone preaches about White Hat SEO, but how can honest marketers/SEOs compete with guys like him? Any thoughts would be very helpful. I can include some of the reports I've gathered if anyone is interested to study this further. thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | howardd0 -
Help needed i have lost huge rankings
help needed guys, i run a website http://www.happyhop.co.za they sell jumping castles, and thats it, i have worked on this site for the last 3 years and its been preforming very well, after the 2.0 penguin update I lost huge rankings was 1 in google for jumping castles now on page 10... I went onto webmaster tools reviewed Manual Actions got this (No manual webspam actions found.) then reviewed my links, ran them through http://www.penguinanalysis.com and my score came back at 125% which is high, but then ran a competitor who is ranking number 1 and they are at 145%... i have now disavowed a few bad links, and have removed alt tags on my blog http://www.happyhop.co.za/News-and-Articles .... the articles I write are not bloggy and are informative. I then sent Google a manual reconsideration request, but havent heard back from them? Still nothing has changed and its been over 3 weeks. Can anyone help me.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | nick_pageone0 -
Is this a clear sign that one of our competitors is doing some serious black-hat SEO?
One of our competitors just recently increased their total external followed looks pretty drastically. Is it safe to say they are doing some pretty black-hat stuff? What actions exactly could this be attributed to? They've been online and in business for 10+ years and I've seen some pretty nasty drops in traffic on compete.com for them over the years. If this is black-hat work in action, would these two things be most likely related? Wh10b97
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Kibin0 -
Is using twiends.com to get twitter followers considered black hatting?
Hi, I've been struggling to get followers on Google Plus and Twitter, and recently stumbled upon twiends.com. It offers an easy service that allows you to get twitter followers very quickly. Is this considered black hating? Even if Google doesn't consider the followers as valid, am I likely to be punished if using their service? Even if it doesn't help rankings, it is nice to have lots of followers so that they will see my tweets which has the potential to drive more traffic to my site, and give awareness to my business. What are your thoughts?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | eugenecomputergeeks0