Cloaking quesation
-
On this page - /design-templates/invitation-cards-come-celebrate-708.aspx the image file location in the source code is src="/design-templates/come-celebrate-708.jpg". But in a browser > right click > save the image, the image file name/location is different "http://www.psprint.com/psp/r//708/708.jpg-001.jpg?1308862042145"
Does it consider cloaking and does this impact to SEO in any ways?
Thanks
Tom
-
Cloaking is defined as providing different content to users then to search engine crawlers. That is not what is happening here. Users and search engines see the same picture.
The source of the image is irrelevant. Many sites use content delivery networks to deliver images. If you are viewing the page from California, then perhaps a server in San Jose, CA will deliver your image. Meanwhile if you view that same page in Texas, then perhaps a Dallas, TX server will deliver the same content. The delivered files COULD have different names or paths, but the actual content delivered should be the same.
No, this is not cloaking and does not impact SEO directly.
As oznappies points out, there may be other issues with the page which cause it to load very slowly and not perform well, and those issues can impact SEO.
-
The image name is different as it is late loaded by a javascript async call to fetch the image. Images are not considered as cloaking and async loads are a common practice. Since the load only seems to load an image and not text content Google would be unlikely to penalise you. But, all that javascript (19 modules) and the 36sec pageload time could cause you a performance penelty as Google introduces this new metric (they are trialing in their beta).
I would suggest you run the site through gtmetrix.com to sort out the performance issues.
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
-
Personalized Content Vs. Cloaking
Hi Moz Community, I have a question about personalization of content, can we serve personalized content without being penalized for serving different content to robots vs. users? If content starts in the same initial state for all users, including crawlers, is it safe to assume there should be no impact on SEO because personalization will not happen for anyone until there is some interaction? Thanks,
Technical SEO | | znotes0 -
Is this Link Black Hat SEO Cloaking or is it OK?
I am a relatively new SEO professional, Can someone please look at this link and tell me if this is white or black hat SEO cloaking practices? http://loghomeconstructionpro.com/ It has an overlay landing page over a html page. I had a partner promote this to me as a proprietary software when really it just looks like cloaking. I want to do my business above board and this doesn't feel right. However, I would like some opinion on it before i pull the plus on my partner. Thanks all for the advice and the help. GD
Technical SEO | | gdavey0 -
Cloaking?
We have on the home page of our charity site a section called "recent donations" which pulls the most recent donations from a database and displays them on the website via an asp write, (equivalent of php echo) . Google is crawling these and sometimes displays them in description tags -- which looks really messy. Is there a way to hide this content without it being considered cloaking?
Technical SEO | | Morris770 -
Cloaking? Best Practices Crawling Content Behind Login Box
Hi- I'm helping out a client, who publishes sale information (fashion sales etc.) In order for the client to view the sale details (date, percentage off etc.) they need to register for the site. If I allow google bot to crawl the content, (identify the user agent) but serve up a registration light box to anyone who isn't google would this be considered cloaking? Does anyone know what the best practice for this is? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Nopadon
Technical SEO | | nopadon0 -
How to defend against link cloaking
Hi, I own a website where recently a lot of backlinks have been going to my old domain that 301's to my new domain. During the past 2 months I have noticed a massive amount of links pointing to my old domain. When I go to look at the links and go to the page all I see is a search bar which to me this seems like link cloaking. I am not sure what I should do. Obviously I am not doing the link building and someone is targeting anchor specific keywords from multiple domains that all look the same. My question is should I report it myself in google webmaster tools before I get hit with a filter or penalty, or would this force them to penalize me. And if I do get caught up in a penalty I would not know how to fix this since I doubt the webmaster is linking to me out of the kindness of his heart. Any advice? Thanks
Technical SEO | | dreamfire0 -
301 Redirect & Cloaking
HEllo~~~~ People. I have a question regarding on cloaking. I will be really greatful if you can help me with question. I have a site www.example.com and it is targeting for multi countries. So I use sub directories for targeting multi countries. e.g. www.example.com/us/ www.example.com/de/ www.example.com/hk/ ....... so on and on. Therefore, when people type www.example.com, I use IP delivery to send users to each coutries. Here is my question. I use 301 redirect for IP delivery, which means when user enter www.example.com, my site read user's IP and send them to right country site by 301 redirect. In this case, is there any possibility that Google considers it as cloaking? Please people.... share me some ideas and thoughs.
Technical SEO | | Artience0 -
Is use of javascript to simplify information architecture considered cloaking?
We are considering using javascript to format URLs to simplify the navigation of the googlebot through our site, whilst presenting a larger number of links for the user to ensure content is accessible and easy to navigate from all parts of the site. In other words, the user will see all internal links, but the search engine will see only those links that form our information hierarchy. We are therefore showing the search engine different content to the user only in so far as the search engine will have a more hierarchical information architecture by virture of the fact that there will be fewer links visible to the search engine to ensure that our content is well structured and discoverable. Would this be considered cloaking by google and would we be penalised?
Technical SEO | | JohnHillman0 -
Honeypot Captcha - rated as "cloaked content"?
Hi guys, in order to get rid of our very old-school captcha on our contact form at troteclaser.com, we would like to use a honeypot captcha. The idea is to add a field that is hidden to human visitors but likely to be filled in by spam-bots. In this way we can sort our all those spam contact requests.
Technical SEO | | Troteclaser
More details on "honeypot captchas":
http://haacked.com/archive/2007/09/11/honeypot-captcha.aspx Any idea if this single cloaked field will have negative SEO-impacts? Or is there another alternative to keep out those spam-bots? Greets from Austria,
Thomas0