Https & http
-
I have my website (HTTP://thespacecollective.com) marked on Google Webmaster Tools as being the primary domain, as opposed to https. But should all of my on page links be http?
For instance, if I click the Home button on my home page it will take the user to http, but if you type in the domain name in the address bar it will take you to https.
Could this be causing me problems for SEO?
-
Thank you!
-
Yes, you should have both active in Search Console, but set the HTTPS to the preferred.
-
You will continue to have both http and https variants active in Google Search Console (you should also add the non www variants and set www as your preferred version).
You do not set anything up within GSC to direct HTTP to HTTPS (to tell Google that you are changing protocols), this is all done via redirects as Logan suggests. Here's a great page which should help clarify this for you:
http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/68435/moving-from-http-to-https-google-search-console
-
Thanks for the additional info but I think you missed my question. Please see the attached image.
I have HTTP and HTTPS set up on Google Search Console. Which one should I be using, or should both be active?
-
Yea, as the bots hit the URLs on your sitemap, it forces them to step through the redirect, which is what you want. They won't notice the new location if you don't point it out to them, and this is the most efficient way to do so.
*To be clear, since this gets confusing in, the URL of the location of your XML should be HTTPS://thespacecollective.com/sitemap.xml, but the URLs listed in it should be HTTP.
Also, add this line to your robots.txt file, as the first line or last line, doesn't really matter:
-
Thanks Logan. Now I have two sites set up in the Google Search Console, http and https. The http version has the sitemap and pretty much everything set up, should I just keep using this even though the site will now be https?
-
When you set up the 301 redirect rule that sends HTTP requests to HTTPS, Google will notice that. Leave your XML sitemap the way it is (with HTTP URL references) for 30 days. This will give them sufficient time to crawl your XML sitemap and learn your new protocol as they hit the redirects. Once most of your indexed pages have switched to HTTPS, you can update your XML to include the secure URLs.
-
Thank you for the links, I have read through each and have decided to change to HTTPS as you advise. I've done everything with the exception of informing Google that the new site is https as opposed to http. How do I make them aware?
I have set up http and https in Webmaster Tools, but how do I tell Google which one is relevant in order to stop any duplicate content issues?
-
From what I understand, you're already decided to split your traffic between HTTP and HTTPS. If this is correct, I would urge you to reconsider and redirect all traffic toward HTTPS versions as there are more issues to consider other than duplicate content, particularly as you are an e-commerce store. The latest (and future) versions of Chrome and Firefox will more clearly highlight unsecured connections. This is from Google's security blog: (https://security.googleblog.com/2016/09/moving-towards-more-secure-web.html?m=1)
"In following releases, we will continue to extend HTTP warnings, for example, by labelling HTTP pages as “not secure” in Incognito mode, where users may have higher expectations of privacy. Eventually, we plan to label all HTTP pages as non-secure, and change the HTTP security indicator to the red triangle that we use for broken HTTPS."
Chrome is the world's most popular browser, used by over 50% of all internet users. If your site is displaying a red triangle with the words 'Not Secure' next to it on ANY page on your site is going to turn visitors away. If over half you your visitors are receiving such a message the consequences will not be good.
Google are pushing users toward HTTPS (https://moz.com/blog/https-tops-30-how-google-is-winning-the-long-war) so I would suggest that it's a mis-step to swim against the tide.
There are also other minor benefits to serving all of your pages via HTTPS; it's a minor ranking signal and better support for browser compression, among others.
Here's another article that covers the recent changes.
https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-is-requiring-https-for-secure-data-in-chrome/183756/
However you proceed, I hope this goes smoothly for you.
Good luck.
-
Perfect, thank you. I'm doing this as we speak!
-
Rolling back to HTTP for non-checkout pages is an option as well. The main point I was trying to make was to not have both versions of your URLs accessible/indexable.
-
Thanks for this Logan. Surely it makes more sense for me to simple change my website to HTTP and just keep Cart/Checkout, etc. as HTTPS? I see changing to HTTPS as a big risk and a lot of unnecessary work for very little benefit.
-
Hi,
Both versions HTTP and HTTPS of your site will render, that's a problem. Since you've got an SSL and it's been applied to the home page, you should make your entire site secure. Once you've done that, you'll want to apply a redirect rule that sends all HTTP requests to the HTTPS version. Because you're not currently doing that, you're running the risk of duplicate content issues. Once you've done that, yes, you should set the primary domain in Google Search Console (WMT) as HTTPS. There's a few other steps you'll want to take as well - Cryus Shepard wrote a great post detailing all necessary steps for secure migration, I highly recommend reading that.
Additionally, when people on your site are bouncing back and forth between HTTP and HTTPS, it's destroying your data integrity in Google Analytics. Going from a HTTP page to a HTTPS page breaks the session, and starts a new one that will be attributed to direct traffic. You can see how this would quickly become a nightmare for accurate analysis and measurement. If you follow the steps in Cyrus' post, your GA data should return to normal because users won't be going back and forth from secure to non-secure.
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
-
Changing Ecommerce Site Display style will it impact on seo & performance?
Hello Expert, Do redesign website will affect seo? At initial level drop in visitor, pageviews? Actually I am redesign my ecommerce site but we are not changing 1) url's 2) we are not changing content 3) we are not changing server 4) we are not changing navigation. We are changing display style at homepage, category page, subcategory page, product page, checkout step. So still it will impact on website visitors & pageviews? 2) How google will react on int 3) How visitor will react? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Johny123450 -
How bad is it to have duplicate content across http:// and https:// versions of the site?
A lot of pages on our website are currently indexed on both their http:// and https:// URLs. I realise that this is a duplicate content problem, but how major an issue is this in practice? Also, am I right in saying that the best solution would be to use rel canonical tags to highlight the https pages as the canonical versions?
Technical SEO | | RG_SEO0 -
New pages need to be crawled & indexed
Hi there, When you add pages to a site, do you need to re-generate an XML site map and re-submit to Google/Bing? I see the option in Google Webmaster Tools under the "fetch as Google tool" to submit individual pages for indexing, which I am doing right now. Thanks,
Technical SEO | | SSFCU
Sarah0 -
Site architecture & breadcrumbs
Hi A client hasn't structured site architecture in a silo type format so breadcrumbs are not predicating in a topical hierarchy as one would desire (or at least i think one would prefer) For example: say the site is called www.fruit.com and it has a category called 'types of fruit' and then sub/content pages called things like 'apples' and 'pears'. So in terms of architecture that should be: www.fruit.com/types-of-fruit/apples and www.fruit.com/types-of-fruit/pears etc etc The client has kept it all flat so instead architecture is: www.fruit.com/types-of-fruit and www.fruit.com/apples and www.fruit.com/pears As a result breadcrumbs follow suit and hence since also not employing logical predication dont reflect the topical & sub-topical hierarchy I have seen that some seo's at least used to think this was better for seo since kept the page/s nearer the root but surely its better to structure site architecture in a logical topical hierarchy so long as dont go beyond say 3 or 4 directories/forward slashes in the url's? Also is it theoretically possible to keep url structure as is (flat) and just edit/customise the breadcrumbs to reflect a topical hierarchy in a silo structure rather than change the entire site architecture & required 301'ing etc in order to do this (or is that misleading or just not possible?) Cheers Dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Redirecting ?iframe=true&width=80%&height=80%
I have a extra page that google has indexed: www.jaaronwoodcountertops.com/?iframe=true&width=80%&height=80% Google has it listed as a page with duplicate content as my index page. I've tried to redirect it but the redirect isn't working on this one. Anyone have an idea of how to deal with this guy?
Technical SEO | | JAARON0 -
HTTP Compression -- Any potential issues with doing this?
We are thinking about turning on the IIS-6 HTTP Compression to help with page load times. Has anyone had any issues with doing this, particularly from an SEO or site functionality standpoint? We just want to double check before we take this step and see if there are any potential pitfalls we may not be aware of. Everything we've read seems to indicate it can only yield positive results. Any thoughts, advice, comments would be appreciated. Thank-you, Matt & Keith
Technical SEO | | MWM37720 -
Thoughts about stub pages - 200 & noindex ok, or 404?
With large database/template driven websites it is often possible to get a lot of pages with no content on them. What are the current thoughts regarding these pages with no content, options; Return a 200 header code with noindex meta tag Return a 404 page & header code Something else? Thanks
Technical SEO | | slingshot0 -
Using DNS & 301 redirects to gain control over a rogue site
I'd appreciate peoples' views on the following please. We have been approached by a client whose website does not rank # 1 for their own distinctive brand name due to this position being taken by a site they had developed for them by an affiliate some years back. The affiliate's site is clearly seen by Google as the definitive site for the brand - being older, having more links & in both Yahoo & DMOZ. The relationship has soured with the affiliate & the client wants to take control of the affiliate site & have it 301 redirect to the 'real' brand site. The affiliate won't cooperate (funny that). However whilst the client doesn't have control over the affiliate's website, they do own the domain. Given this, it seems that an option is to temporarily create a 1 page website on another server, change the affiliate website domain DNS settings to point to this, & in turn have that 301 re-direct to the client's website. This is a bit of a round about approach, but necessary because the affiliate won't directly 301 the site they control - despite the client owning it. (As I say the relationship has soured). If you think there's a better alternative approach to this problem (aside from litigation), I'd appreciate hearing it please. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | SureFire0