HTTP to HTTPS Question
-
Hello,
I have a question regarding SSL Certificates I think I know the answer to but wanted to make sure. One of our clients’ site uses http for their pages but when they started creating Registration forms they created a full duplicate site on https (so now there are two versions of all of the pages).
I know due to duplicate concerns this could be an issue and needs to resolved (as well as the pros and cons of both) but if they are already set up with https does it make sense to just move everything there or in some instances would it pay to keep some pages http (using canonical tags, redirects, htccess…etc)? – Most of the information I found related to making the decision prior to having both or describing the process but I couldn’t find anything that specifically related to if both are already present.
I thought that the best approach because everything’s already set up is to just move everything over to the more secure one but was curious if anybody had any insight?
Thank you in advance.
-
Thank you Bernadette for that response and help. That’s what I thought would be the solution. Am I correct in assuming that because the http version is currently being indexed that there would most likely be an associated temporary drop in results while Google sorts everything out? – Because they are a seasonal-heavy business I’m trying to plan this accordingly so any experience/insight would be appreciated.
Thanks again.
-
Ben, Tom is right. Having both versions out there can lead to duplicate content issues, especially if the site is linking to both versions of the site (which tends to happen). The best option is to make EVERY page on the site HTTPs, and move completely away from HTTP in its entirety. You should set up 301 permanent redirects so that all HTTP pages get redirected to HTTPs.
Don't forget to verify the HTTPs version of the site in Google Search Console, and if you have done anything with the Disavow Tool you'll want to upload a new disavow file for HTTPs, as well.
-
Thank you Tom for your response. Currently only the http pages come up for the ‘site:’ search. I was considering implementing Search Console on the ‘https’ site to make sure it’s not being indexed…thoughts?
If the https version is not yet being indexed, as a preventative measure should we still migrate the site to the secure version (while pagerank is unaffected) or does it pay to go through every page that does not need it and keep as http?
Thanks again in advance.
Best,
-
Hi Ben,
Having both running I think is the worst outcome. If you do a site:https://domain.com query what pages show up? If you've got the https pages showing, then you're already indexed. I would personally look at moving fully over to https as long as all of the canonicals etc are all working properly.
Now is the best time to do the migration, due to http->https pages not losing pagerank (or apparently redirects not losing pagerank either)
Tom
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
-
Robots.txt & Disallow: /*? Question!
Hi, I have a site where they have: Disallow: /*? Problem is we need the following indexed: ?utm_source=google_shopping What would the best solution be? I have read: User-agent: *
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vetofunk
Allow: ?utm_source=google_shopping
Disallow: /*? Any ideas?0 -
Still Seeing GSC Traffic in HTTP Property Post-Migration
We migrated to HTTPS in June 2017, so why would I still be seeing a bit of traffic in our HTTP property in Google Search Console? QyqQ2
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | catbur0 -
Is something wrong with my index after https switch?
I have previously switched sites to https but this one is behaving a little different. On September 19th I switched to https. I did 301 redirects at the .htaccess, added it to search console, and since we are using Magento I changed the base url. In the past when I have done this the http site index just gradually drops while the https site gradually rises. In early October the http site started to slightly drop but since 10/23 there have been no changes. For the https site it started to increase up until 10/23 then stayed flat. Why have they stayed stuck like that for a month?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Tylerj0 -
Question about structuring @id schema tags
We are using JSON-LD to apply schema. My colleague had question about applying @id tags in the schema parent lists: While implementing schema, we've included @id as a parameter to both the "list" child of "ListItem" of a "BreadcrumbList" - on the same schema, we've added an @id parameter to mainContentOfPage and both @id parameters are set to the pages URL. Having this @id in both places is giving schema checker results that have the child elements of "mainContentOfPage" appearing under the "list" item. Questions: is this good or bad? Where should @id be used? What should @id be set to? Thanks for the insight!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB0 -
Canonicals question ref canonicals pointing to redundant urls
Hi, SCENARIO: A site has say 3 examples of the same product page but with different urls because that product fits into 3 different categories e.g. /tools/hammer /handtools/hammer /specialoffers/hammer and lets say the first 2 of those have the canonical pointing to /specialoffers/hammer YET that page is now redundant e.g. the webmaster decided to do away with the /specialoffers/ folder. ASSUMPTIONS: That is going to seriously hamper the chances of the 2 remaining versions of the hammer page being able to rank as they have canonicals pointing to a url that no longer exists. The canonical tags should be changed to point to 1 of the remaining url versions. As an added complication - lets say /specialoffers/hammer still exists, the url works, but just isn't navigable from the site. Thoughts/feedback welcome!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AndyMacLean0 -
A few important mobile SEO questions
I have a few basic questions about mobile SEO. I'd appreciate if any of you fabulous Mozzers can enlighten me. Our site has a parallel mobile site with the same urls, using an m. domain for mobile and www. for desktop. On mobile pages, we have a rel="canonical" tag pointing to the matching desktop URL and on desktop pages we have a rel="alternate" tag pointing to the matching mobile URL. When someone visits a www. page using a mobile device, we 301 them to the mobile version. Questions: 1. Do I want my mobile pages to be indexed by Google? From Tom's (very helpful) answers here, it seems that I only want Google indexing the full site pages and if the mobile pages are indexed it's actually a duplicate content issue. This is really confusing to me since Google knows that it's not duplicate content based on the canonical tag. But - he makes a good point - what is the value of having the mobile page indexed if the same page on desktop is indexed (I know that Google is indexing both because I see them in search results. When I search on mobile Google serves the mobile page and when I search on desktop Google serves me the desktop page.)? Are these pages competing with each other? Currently, we are doing everything we can do ensure that our mobile pages are crawled (deeply) and indexed, but now I'm not sure what the value of this is? Please share your knowledge. 2. Is a mobile page's ranking affected by social shares of the desktop version of the same page? Currently, when someone uses the share buttons on our mobile site, we share the desktop url (www. - not m.). The reason we do this is that we are afraid that if people are sharing our content with 2 different url's (m.mysite.com/some_post and www.mysite.com/some_post) the share count will not be aggregated for both url's. What I'm wondering is: will this have a negative effect on mobile SEO, since it will seem to Google that our mobile pages have no shares, or is this not a problem, since the desktop pages have a rel="alternate" tag pointing to mobile pages, so Google gives the same ranking to the mobile page as the desktop page (which IS being shared)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | YairSpolter0 -
Internal links question
I've read that Google frowns upon large numbers of internal links. We're building a site that helps users browse a list of shows via dozens of genres. If the genres are expose, say, as a pulldown menu as opposed to a list of static links, and selecting the pulldown option filters the list of shows, would those genres count against our internal links count?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheaterMania0 -
Video Sitemap Creation Question
I have created a sitemap file as per Google Web Master Tools instructions. I have it saved as a .txt file. Am I right in thinking that this needs to be uploaded as a .xml file? If so, how do I convert this to a XML? I have tried but it seems to corrupt - there must be a simple way to do this?!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DHS_SH0