User Agent -teracent-feed-processing
-
Does anyone knows some info about "teracent-feed-processing" user agent?
IP's from which user agent reside: 74.125.113.145, 74.125.113.148, 74.125.187.84 ....
In our logs, 2 out of 3 requests are made by it, causing server crash.
-
It seems that the Sudden drop in indexed pages reported in WMT might relate to some reporting issues from Google - https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/webmasters/qkvudy6VqnM;context-place=topicsearchin/webmasters/sitemap|sort:date
-
Since "teracent-feed-processing" didn't followed the rules in robots.txt, we had to hard-block it. If server detects the user agent beeing "teracent-feed-processing" it will drop the connection: _ (104) Connection reset by peer_
-
Well it isn't Googlebot and it isn't one I have come across before. Don't forget that any user agent can be spoofed very easily so I wouldn't worry about blocking it.
**Should I assume that the drop in reported indexed pages is a result of blocking the teracent-feed-processing user agent? **
I really don't think that this is Google. The only one they have is Googlebot, and tell you this is the one to add if you wish to block them.
Just a thought, can you share your robots.txt file just to make sure pages aren't being unintentionally blocked?
-Andy
-
It seems that "teracent-feed-processing" user agent is somehow linked to Google. If you analyse the Ip's , you'll noticed that are Google owned. Teracent company has been bought by Google in 2009.
btw - we've already blocked it, but I'm trying to figure it out what's the key role played by this user agent. We've also noticed a drastic decline in number of pages being reported in Google Webmaster Tools (half of what we used to have). Should I assume that the drop in reported indexed pages is a result of blocking the teracent-feed-processing user agent?
-
It sounds like your typical spammy site so I would suggest just blocking them. Add the following to the top of your robots.txt file:
**User-agent: teracent-feed-processing** **Disallow: /** However, before you go live with this, use the webmaster tools Robots.txt tester to make sure everything else still gets crawled. -Andy
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
-
Google Search Console and User-declared canonical is actually Hreflang tag
Hey, We recently launched a US version of UK based ecommerce website on the us.example.com subdomain. Both websites are on Shopify so canonical tags are handled automatically and we have implemented Hreflang tags across both websites. Suddenly our rankings in the UK have dropped and after looking in search console for the UK site ive found that a lot of pages are now no longer indexed in Google because the User-declared canonical is the Hreflang tag for the US URL. Below is an example https://www.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet - is the product page is the canonical tag rel="alternate" href="https://www.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet" hreflang="en-gb" /> - UK hreflang tag rel="alternate" href="https://us.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet" hreflang="en-us" /> - US Hreflang tag then in Google search console the user-defined canonical is https://us.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet but it should be https://www.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet The UK website has been assigned to target the United Kingdom in Search Console and the US website has been assigned to target the United States. We also do not have access to robots.txt file unfortunately. Any help or insight would be greatly appreciated.
Technical SEO | | PeterRubber0 -
Site architecture? I've got a free user report, that shoots back a page with their data for them to share with co-workers and friends.
Hi, I have a site about to go online that users can run a free report that connects to their calendar app to get 12 months of statistics for their meetings, and then it shoots out a report. So they go to a.com/freereport and they get back a.zom/freereport/report/xxxxxx The content of those reports is different, but the structure is the same as it is a fun way to show off meeting stats to co-workers and friends. I don't see the point of Google indexing those as the traffic to those pages is going to be from social networks and viral, but I do want the backlink credit. Will I get backlink credit if I nofollow that folder? I am having a hard time deciding what to do seo wise and would love some thoughts and advice, what would you recommend? Do nothing fancy. Mark the report folder no follow. Try to do something with rel=cannonical to point those pages to the root page? Thoughts?
Technical SEO | | bwb0 -
Schema Markup for property listings (estate agent)
Hello, I've been looking online for some help with this. An estate agent has a page of properties for sale. Is it possible to mark these individual properties up and if so would they appear as rich snippets in the SERPS - never seen anything like this for properties for sale so just wondered,
Technical SEO | | AL123al1 -
Different URLs for signed in and signed out users
Hello, I have a client that plans to use different URLs for signed in and signed out customers. My concern is that signed in and signed out customers will provide back links to different URLs of the same page and thus split page rank. I'm assuimg the URL for signed in customers won't be fetched by Google and therefore rule out canonicalizing the signed in URL to the signed out version. The solution for me would be to ensure that there is only one URL for each content page, and to instead use cookies to prompt customers to sign up to the service that aren’t already a customer. However, please correct me if I’m wrong in my assumptions. Thanks
Technical SEO | | SEONOW1230 -
HTTP Vary:User-Agent Server or Page Level?
Looking for any insights regarding the usage of the Vary HTTP Header. Mainly around the idea that search engines will not like having a Vary HTTP Header on pages that don't have a mobile version, which means the header will be to be implemented on a page-by-page basis. Additionally, does anyone has experience with the usage of the Vary HTTP Header and CDNs like Akamai?Google still recommends using the header, even though it can present some challenges with CDNs. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | burnseo0 -
SEO for User Authenticated Content
Hi Everyone - I have a potential client who is seeking SEO for a site that contains about 95% of content only accessible through user authentication . Does anyone have tips for getting this indexed without having to open it up to the public? I was considering adding "snippets" into the robots.txt or creating an additional page with snippets linking to the login page. I'd appreciate any thoughts! Thanks!
Technical SEO | | manutx0 -
User Reviews Question
On my e-commerce site, I have user reviews that cycle in the header section of my category pages. They appear/cycle via a snippet of code that the review program provided me with. My question is...b/c the actual user-generated content is not in the page content does the google-bot not see this content? Does it not treat the page as having fresh content even though the reviews are new? Does the bot only see the code that provides the reviews? Thanks in advance. Hopefully this question is clear enough.
Technical SEO | | IOSC0 -
Does Google take user site blockings from Chrome as a spam signal?
When you perform a search in Chrome, click through to a result, then hit "back", you get a nice little option to "Block all example.com results" listed next to the result from which you backed out. I am assuming Google collects this information from Chrome users whose settings allow them to? I am assuming this is a spam signal (in aggregate)? Anyone know? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | TheEspresseo0