Articles marked with "This site may be hacked," but I have no security issues in the search console. What do I do?
-
There are a number of blog articles on my site that have started receiving the "This site may be hacked" warning in the SERP.
I went hunting for security issues in the Search Console, but it indicated that my site is clean. In fact, the average position of some of the articles has increased over the last few weeks while the warning has been in place.
The problem sounds very similar to this thread: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!category-topic/webmasters/malware--hacked-sites/wmG4vEcr_l0 but that thread hasn't been touched since February. I'm fearful that the Google Form is no longer monitored.
What other steps should I take?
One query where I see the warning is "Brand Saturation" and this is the page that has the warning: http://brolik.com/blog/should-you-strive-for-brand-saturation-in-your-marketing-plan/
-
Thanks, Paul. We started resubmitting the cleaned pages yesterday. I passed your comments about the Apache install and the old version of PHP to the devs as well.
At the very least, this is a great learning experience for us. It's great to have such a helpful community.
-
It looks like the devs have cleaned up most of the obvious stuff, Matthew, so I'd get to work resubmitting the pages that were marked as hacked but now longer show that issue.
Do make sure the devs keep working on finding and cleaning up attack vectors (or just bite the bullet and pay for a year of Sucuri cleanup and protection) but it's important to get those marked pages discovered as clean before too much longer.
Also of note - your site's server's Apache install is quite a bit out of date and you're running a very old version of PHP as well that hasn't been getting even security updates for over a year. Those potential attack vectors need to be addressed right away too.
Good luck getting back into Big G's good graces!
Paul
P.S. Easy way to find the pages marked as hacked for checking/resubmission is a "site:" search e.g. enter **site:brolik.com **into a Google search.
P.P.S. Also noted that you have many pages from brolik-temp.com also still indexed. The domain name just expired yesterday, but the indexed pages showed a 302-redirect to the main domain, according to the Wayback Machine. These should be 301s in order to help get the pages to eventually drop out of the SERPS. (And with 301s in place, you could either submit a "Change of Address" for that domain in Webmaster Tools/GSC or you do a full removal request. Either way, I wouldn't want those test domain pages to remain in the indexes.
-
Thank you, Paul. That was going to be my next question: what to do when the blog is clean.
Unfortunately, the dev's are still frantically pouring through code hunting for the problem. Hopefully they find it soon.
-
Just a heads-up that you'll want to get this cleaned up as quickly as possible, Matthew. Time really is of the essence here.
Once this issue is recognised by the crawler as being widespread enough to trigger a warning in GSC, it can take MONTHS to get the hacked warning removed from the SERPS after cleanup.
Get the hack cleaned up, then immediately start submitting the main pages of the site back to Fetch as Google tool to get them recrawled and detected as clean.
I recently went through a very similar situation with a client and was able to get the hacked notification removed for most URLs within 3 and 4 days of cleanup.
Paul
-
Passed it on to the dev. Thanks for the response.
I'll let you know if they run into any trouble cleaning it up.
-
It is hacked, you just have to look at the page as Googlebot. Sadly, I have seen this before.
If you set your user agent as Googlebot - you will see a different page (see attached images). Note that the Title, H1 tags and content are updated to show info on how to Buy Zithromax. This is a JS insertion hack where when the user agent is shown as Googlebot they overwrite your content and insert links to pages to help gain links. This is very black hat and bad and yes scary. (See attached images below)
I use "User Agent Switcher" on FF to set my user agent - there are lots of other tools for FF and Chrome to do this. You can also run a spider on your site such as screaming frog and set the user agent to Googlebot and you will see all the changed H1s and title tags,
It is clever as "humans" will not see this, but the bots will so it is hard to detect. Also, if you have multiple servers, you may only have 1 of the servers impacted and so you may not see this each time depending on what server your load balancer is sending you to. You may want to use Fetch as Google in Webmaster console and see what Google sees.
This is very serious, show this to your dev and get it fixed ASAP. You can PM me if you need more information etc.
Good luck!
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
-
Are HTML Sitemaps Still Effective With "Noindex, Follow"?
A site we're working on has hundreds of thousands of inventory pages that are generally "orphaned" pages. To reach them, you need to do a lot of faceting on the search results page. They appear in our XML sitemaps as well, but I'd still consider these orphan pages. To assist with crawling and indexation, we'd like to create HTML sitemaps to link to these pages. Due to the nature (and categorization) of these products, this would mean we'll be creating thousands of individual HTML sitemap pages, which we're hesitant to put into the index. Would the sitemaps still be effective if we add a noindex, follow meta tag? Does this indicate lower quality content in some way, or will it make no difference in how search engines will handle the links therein?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mothner0 -
Merging B2B site with B2C site
Hi, A mobile phone accessory client of ours has a retail site (B2C) and a trade site (B2B). The retail site does pretty well and ranks highly for a number of terms. The trade site doesn't really rank for anything as they don't optimise it. They would like to merge the two sites and allow trade customers to log-in and purchase goods in bulk for their business. If they were to merge the trade site into the already successful consumer site, what would be the best way of doing this and what, if any, implications would it have on the organic visibility of the B2C site? Would it be possible to target retail and trade customers on one website? Cheers, Lewis
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeaSoupDigital0 -
Google favoring old site over new site...
Hi, I started a new site for a client: www.berenjifamilylaw.com. His old site: www.bestfamilylawattorney.com was too loaded up with bad links. Here's the weird part: when you Google: "Los Angeles divorce lawyer" you see the old site come up on the 21st page, but Google doesn't even show the new site (even though it is indexed). It's been about 2 weeks now and no change. Has anyone experienced something like this? If so, what did you do (if anything). Also, I did NOT do a 301 redirect from old to new b/c of spammy links. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mrodriguez14400 -
Should pages with rel="canonical" be put in a sitemap?
I am working on an ecommerce site and I am going to add different views to the category pages. The views will all have different urls so I would like to add the rel="canonical" tag to them. Should I still add these pages to the sitemap?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EcommerceSite0 -
Spammy sites that link to a site
Hello, What is the best and quickest way to identify spammy sites that link to a website, and then remove them ( google disavow?) Thank you dear Moz, community - I appreciate your help 🙂 Sincerely, Vijay
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vijayvasu0 -
Site Search Results in Index -- Help
Hi, I made a mistake on my site, long story short, I have a bunch of search results page in the Google index. (I made a navigation page full of common search terms, and made internal links to a respective search results page for each common search term.) Google crawled the site, saw the links and now those search results pages are indexed. I made versions of the indexed search results pages into proper category pages with good URLs and am ready to go live/ replace the pages and links. But, I am a little unsure how to do it /what the effects can be: Will there be duplicate content issues if I just replace the bad, search results links/URLs with the good, category page links/URLs on the navi. page? (is a short term risk worth it?) Should I get the search results pages de-indexed first and then relaunch the navi. page with the correct category URLs? Should I do a robots.txt disallow directive for search results? Should I use Google's URL removal tool to remove those indexed search results pages for a quick fix, or will this cause more harm than good? Time is not the biggest issue, I want to do it right, because those indexed search results pages do attract traffic and the navi. page has been great for usability. Any suggestions would be great. I have been reading a ton on this topic, but maybe someone can give me more specific advice. Thanks in advance, hopefully this all makes sense.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IOSC1 -
Does Google crawl the pages which are generated via the site's search box queries?
For example, if I search for an 'x' item in a site's search box and if the site displays a list of results based on the query, would that page be crawled? I am asking this question because this would be a URL that is non existent on the site and hence am confused as to whether Google bots would be able to find it.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pulseseo0 -
Posing QU's on Google Variables "aclk", "gclid" "cd", "/aclk" "/search", "/url" etc
I've been doing a bit of stats research prompted by read the recent ranking blog http://www.seomoz.org/blog/gettings-rankings-into-ga-using-custom-variables There are a few things that have come up in my research that I'd like to clear up. The below analysis has been done on my "conversions". 1/. What does "/aclk" mean in the Referrer URL? I have noticed a strong correlation between this and "gclid" in the landing page variable. Does it mean "ad click" ?? Although they seem to "closely" correlate they don't exactly, so when I have /aclk in the referrer Url MOSTLY I have gclid in the landing page URL. BUT not always, and the same applies vice versa. It's pretty vital that I know what is the best way to monitor adwords PPC, so what is the best variable to go on? - Currently I am using "gclid", but I have about 25% extra referral URL's with /aclk in that dont have "gclid" in - so am I underestimating my number of PPC conversions? 2/. The use of the variable "cd" is great, but it is not always present. I have noticed that 99% of my google "Referrer URL's" either start with:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James77
/aclk - No cd value
/search - No cd value
/url - Always contains the cd variable. What do I make of this?? Thanks for the help in advance!0