How to check if a site is doing blackhat SEO?
-
Thanks in advance!
-
It really depends on what you define as blackhat. On-page trickery (cloaking, redirects for search engines bots, etc.) can be discovered by browsing as a search bot, digging into code, viewing caches, etc. Danny Sullivan and Rand uncovered a large amount of cloaked (and stolen) content on stage at SMX Sydney a few years ago. It was quite entertaining at the time
Some people are basic enough to use tactics like hidden, white-on-white text, as Martijn says. I'm yet to see that tactic actually working post-2004 though
If it's links they're using, the easiest way is to use a tool like Open Site Explorer, Ahrefs or similar to check the links out. Sneaky people can block the OSE / Ahrefs / MajesticSEO bots from crawling the sources of their backhat links if they have access to the linking sites. You can block the bots either in robots.txt or by rejecting the visits to stop the bots from noting that the links exist. That way, the backlink analysis tools will never see that blackhatsite.com links to rankingsite.com, and so forth. It takes a big network that the spammer controls to block link research tools' bots' access to every link you build, however, so this isn't too common.
Whether all big brands / well ranked sites are using blackhat tactics pretty much depends on your definition of blackhat, but it's certainly true that it is very hard if not impossible to rank top 3 for competitive terms (car insurance, poker, credit cards) without parting with money that results in links being built. This doesn't mean that they're all buying links, but they're definitely investing in marketing that results in links, and the whitest of the whitehats will say that this is technically not organic, natural link development. It is, however, what we do - marketing.
-
Why does it matter?
-
An even easier way is to check their rankings - if they're top 3 for big money terms in their niche, they're probably using some blackhat tactics. Even the whitest of whitehats are still using some blackhat tactics in the background, despite people not wanting to admit it.
-
I can't agree more with Gary, we probably need some more information to know what kind of black hat you're possibily dealing with. One of the first things I tend to look at trying to find out if the site is using some ways of black hat tactics are:
- Backlink profile, if the quality of links is low or certain percentages between follow/ nofollow links are different then it could be a sign.
- Look at the site with Google as a user agent and see if the site is showing different information then to a real user.
- Just do a select all on the site to see if they hide any content (yup, still happens).
-
Your question is a bit to open ended, what do you want to achieve by knowing this information.
Does a site rank better than you?
Are they doing negative seo to other people?
Do they steal content from people?Are they building links as dofollow from places they should not?Too many questions to ask before answering such a vague answer.
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
-
Infinite Scrolling on Publisher Sites - is VentureBeat's implementation really SEO-friendly?
I've just begun a new project auditing the site of a news publisher. In order to increase pageviews and thus increase advertising revenue, at some point in the past they implemented something so that as many as 5 different articles load per article page. All articles are loaded at the same time and from looking in Google's cache and the errors flagged up in Search Console, Google treats it as one big mass of content, not separate pages. Another thing to note is that when a user scrolls down, the URL does in fact change when you get to the next article. My initial thought was to remove this functionality and just load one article per page. However I happened to notice that VentureBeat.com uses something similar. They use infinite scrolling so that the other articles on the page (in a 'feed' style) only load when a user scrolls to the bottom of the first article. I checked Google's cached versions of the pages and it seems that Google also only reads the first article which seems like an ideal solution. This obviously has the benefit of additionally speeding up loading time of the page too. My question is, is VentureBeat's implementation actually that SEO-friendly or not. VentureBeat have 'sort of' followed Google's guidelines with regards to how to implement infinite scrolling https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2014/02/infinite-scroll-search-friendly.html by using prev and next tags for pagination https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1663744?hl=en. However isn't the point of pagination to list multiple pages in a series (i.e. page 2, page 3, page 4 etc.) rather than just other related articles? Here's an example - http://venturebeat.com/2016/11/11/facebooks-cto-explains-social-networks-10-year-mission-global-connectivity-ai-vr/ Would be interesting to know if someone has dealt with this first-hand or just has an opinion. Thanks in advance! Daniel
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Daniel_Morgan1 -
WP Datar site shady linking to my site
Hello, I have done some research on this but cannot find a solid answer to my question. After recently reviewing my "not found" errors in webmaster tools, I see that a site called "WP Datar" has linked to a number of our pages that actually do not exist. I am wondering first, if this will harm our site, and second, what is the best way to get those links from their site taken down? I tried emailing, but of course, the email address listed on the site did not work. 🙂 Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | lfrazer0 -
Alt tag best practices for a mutli gallery site with hundreds of images
I have neglected to add alt tags to one of my sites, and am ready to tackle the project. I want to make sure I do not do something that will have a negative impact on rankings....and I have not been able to find info that fits my situation. The pics are all about a product I make and sell through the site. I have a free gallery section that has about 10 galleries with about 20 pics each. Each gallery page has a different model and/or context of how the product. might be used. These are not sales pages directly just thumbnail galleries linked to larger images for the viewers enjoyment. I have 10 or so keyword phrases that would be good to use, with the intent to start getting listed in google images and other rank enhancements. Can I choose one keyword phrase as my alt tag choice for a whole gallery and give each individual large pic in the gallery that same alt tag, And use a different phrase for the next gallery's pics etc.? Or is that thought of as stuffing, and I would have to come up with a different keyword phrase for each pic? I hope that makes sense. Thanks Galen
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Tetruss0 -
Authorship Photo Not showing. Done all checks still photo not coming
Can someone suggest - authorship photo not showing - have asked this earlier too but did not get much response on it Site URL http://www.mycarhelpline.com/index.php?option=com_easyblog&view=entry&id=93&Itemid=91 http://www.mycarhelpline.com/index.php?option=com_latestnews&view=detail&n_id=479&Itemid=10 Google + https://plus.google.com/109551624336693902828/posts Have done checks :- ?rel=author at end of profile url on site - Yes Profile discovery option on in Google+ - yes Contributor link in Google+ - yes Email validation done - yes Photo fitted in size - yes Rich snippet showing authorship established with photo - yes still the photo not coming in for last 6 months now. Any suggestion pls Even on searching name 'Gagan Modi' - the photo do show in Search result of google plus profile. But rich snippet as author photo do not show in for the site.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Modi0 -
Has my site been penalized by google
Hi all I have noticed a sudden drop in rankings for most of my keywords on kerryblu ,co,uk and was thinking the site may have been manually penalized by google. I have not received any notification of this in webmaster tools but can't think of any other reason for the loss of rankings. I have searched the web for info on this but can't find a definite answer. Is there any way of knowing for sure. At the time of the crash the only real change I made was adding google adsense to my blog. Could this be responsible. Thanks for looking.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Dill0 -
Identifying why my site has a penalty
Hi, My site has been hit with a google penalty of some sort, but it doesn't coincide with a penguin or panda update. I have attached a graph of my visits that demonstrates this. I have been working on my SEO since the latter part of last year and have been seeing good results, then all of a sudden my search referrals dropped by 70%. Can anyone advise on what it could be? Thanks! Will XBvZq2e
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | madegood0 -
Yet another Negative SEO attack question.
I need help reconciling two points of view on spammy links. On one hand, Google seems to say, "Don't build spammy links to your website - it will hurt your ranking." Of course, we've seen the consequences of this from the Penguin update, of those who built bad links got whacked. From the Penguin update, there was then lots of speculation of Negative SEO attacks. From this, Google is saying, "We're smart enough to detect a negative SEO attack.", i.e: http://youtu.be/HWJUU-g5U_I So, its seems like Google is saying, "Build spammy links to your website in an attempt to game rank, and you'll be penalized; build spammy links to a competitors website, and we'll detect it and not let it hurt them." Well, to me, it doesn't seem like Google can have it both ways, can they? Really, I don't understand why Competitor A doesn't just go to Fiverr and buy a boatload of crappy exact match anchor links to Competitor B in an attempt to hurt Competitor B. Sure, Competitor B can disavow those links, but that still takes time and effort. Furthermore, the analysis needed for an unsophisticated webmaster could be daunting. Your thoughts here? Can Google have their cake and eat it too?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ExploreConsulting0 -
How The HELL Is This Site Ranking So Well In Google Places?
When I do a search for this site it ranks number 2 on Google just below the official federation of master builders website for the keyword phase "builders in london" this is the site http://bit.ly/Lypo8E which is a nasty looking blog which has nothing to do with builders and they don't even have an address anywhere on the site. The only thing I can see is that they are sharing there address with a lot of other businesses and all of the citations from those other businesses are causing them to rank higher on Google places, but surely Google can't be that stupid right?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | penn730