Spammy page with canonical reference to my website
-
A potentially spammy website http://www.rofof.com/ has included a rel canonical tag pointing to my website. They've included the tag on thousands of pages on their website. Furthermore http://www.rofof.com/ appears to have backlinks from thousands of other low-value domains
For example www.kazamiza.com/vb/kazamiza242122/, along with thousands of other pages on thousands of other domains all link to pages on rofof.com, and the pages they link to on rofof.com are all canonicalized to a page on my site.
If Google does respect the canonical tag on rofof.com and treats it as part of my website then the thousands of spammy links that point to rofof.com could be considered as pointing to my website.
I'm trying to contact the owner of www.rofof.com hoping to have the canonical tag removed from their website. In the meantime, I've disavowed the www.rofof.com, the site that has canonical tag. Will that have any effect though? Will disavow eliminate the effect of a rel canonical tag on the disavowed domain or does it only affect links on the disavowed website? If it only affects links then should I attempt to disavow all the pages that link to rofof.com?
Thanks for reading. I really appreciate any insight you folks can offer.
-
Thanks, good to hear!
-
Thanks for your input David!
-
Hi Bruce,
There was a bit of a debate about this recently - whether a cross-domain canonical could be a new type of negative SEO attack: https://www.seroundtable.com/google-negative-seo-via-canonicals-redirects-25614.html
But I personally don't think it would be a successful negative SEO strategy.
Having disavowed the domain, I think you have taken all the precautions you can and I wouldn't be too worried about this having a negative impact on your traffic and rankings.
Cheers,
David
-
Oh dear what a kerfuffle. People are always searching for new negative-SEO assault deployments!
In February 2018 Moz actually covered the subject of cross-domain canonical tag usage:
Apparently it can work but only under very specific circumstances:
- The content of the 'canonicaling' URL matches the canonical destination
- The headline of the 'canonicaling' URL's content matches that of the canonical destination
- In-Content Links of the 'canonicaling' URL match those of the canonical destination
So unless the content on their pages happens to be almost identical to the content on the page on your site which the tags are linking to; they're pretty much boneheads and this isn't a major concern.
In all likelihood nothing bad will happen but you could try using Google's Disavow tool (https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/disavow-links-main) to send them a signal that you do not wish to be 'associated' with the spam-site in question. It is unknown (or at least I haven't heard) whether the disavow tool covers canonical links. I would think that it would at least prompt Google to fundamentally disassociate the two sites.
More than likely those behind the attack are fully aware that it is extremely unlikely to harm you. They probably have a network of machine-built sites launching the same (fake) attack against thousands of webmasters. My guess is that they are preying on ignorance, hoping that some webmasters will pay them to take the tags off.
DON'T fall for it
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
-
How to index your website pages on Google 2020 ?
Hey! Hopefully, everyone is fine here I tell you some step how you are index your all website pages on Google 2020. I'm already implementing these same steps for my site Boxes Maker. Now Below I'm giving you some steps for indexing your website pages. These are the most important ways to help Google find your pages: Add a sitemap. ... Make sure people know your site. ... Ensure full navigation on your site. ... Apply the indexing application to your homepage. ... Sites that use URL parameters other than URLs or page names may be more difficult to broadcast.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fbowable0 -
Sale Pages On An eCommerce Website
I have a client who sells 50 brands of shoes. At the moment the developer has a noindex/nofollow tag on all sale pages which is wrong as around 10% of site activity revolves around those pages. The structure looks like this: 1. For Cats/Sub Cats site/sale
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nigel_Carr
site/womens/sale
site/womens/shoe/sale
site/womens/shoes/ballerinas/sale For every cat/subcat - there are 10 cats and average 5 subcats per cat so 50 pages of sale. 2. For Brands site/brand
site/brand/womens
site/sale/brand
site/sale/womens/brand
site/sale/womens/cat/brand
site/sale/womens/cat/subcat/brand So each brand can have four sale pages on top of its own brand page. 50 brands x 54 = around 2700. Now no one is going to start writing 2700 pieces of additional on page content (although Meta is OK! ) and we risk further diluting the brand pages we need to show highly for, so we need to do something. Should we Category Pages: 1. Allow all sale cat and subcat pages to proliferate through Google? or
2. Canonicalise all sale sub category pages back to category
3. Caonicalise all category and Subcategory pages back to sale/womens Brand Pages: 1. Allow all sale brand pages to proliferate through Google ?
2. Canonicalise Sub Cat brand pages back to sale/category/brand
3. Canonicalise Sub Cat and Cat back to sale/brand Note the lower pages never do well in search. If you search a brand + Sale in Google it is always the site/brand page that comes up, never the sale version (This is from research on other similar sites and my own analysis) Same with Sub Cats - eg, Brand + Subcat - it's always site/brand that comes up first wand has the highest PA. Also we can't analyse any of these sale pages in MOZ or anywhere else as they are not in search at all having been no indexed. That's my conundrum for today, Any thoughts would be appreciated!0 -
Do 403 Forbidden errors from website pages hurt rankings?
Hi All, I noticed that our website has lot of 403 errors across different pages using the tool http://www.deadlinkchecker.com/. Do these errors hurt website rankings? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Category Pages
I'm debating on what the best category structure is for a recipe website and was looking to get some advice. It's a recipe/travel/health fitness blog but recipes reign on the site. Should it be: Option A website name\recipe\type of recipe\URL of specific recipe or Option B website name\type of recipe\url of specific recipe (and just cut out the 'recipe' category name) Any advise would be appreciated! Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Rich-DC0 -
Can SPA (single page architecture) websites be SEO friendly?
What is the latest consensus on SPA web design architecture and SEO friendliness?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Robo342
By SPA, I mean rather than each page having its own unique URL, instead each page would have an anchor added to a single URL. For example: Before SPA: website.com/home/green.html After SPA: website.com/home.html#green (rendering a new page using AJAX) It would seem that Google may have trouble differentiating pages with unique anchors vs unique URLs, but have they adapted to this style of architecture yet? Are there any best practices around this? Some developers are moving to SPA as the state of the art in architecture (e.g., see this thread: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Google-crawling-websites-built-using-121615.S.219120193), and yet there may be a conflict between SPA and SEO. Any thoughts or black and white answers? Thanks.0 -
I've seen and heard alot about city-specific landing pages for businesses with multiple locations, but what about city-specific landing pages for cities nearby that you aren't actually located in? Is it ok to create landing pages for nearby cities?
I asked here https://www.google.com/moderator/#7/e=adbf4 but figured out ask the Moz Community also! Is it actually best practice to create landing pages for nearby cities if you don't have an actual address there? Even if your target customers are there? For example, If I am in Miami, but have a lot of customers who come from nearby cities like Fort Lauderdale is it okay to create those LP's? I've heard this described as best practice, but I'm beginning to question whether Google sees it that way.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RickyShockley2 -
Duplicate Content http://www.website.com and http://website.com
I'm getting duplicate content warnings for my site because the same pages are getting crawled twice? Once with http://www.website.com and once with http://website.com. I'm assuming this is a .htaccess problem so I'll post what mine looks like. I think installing WordPress in the root domain changed some of the settings I had before. My main site is primarily in HTML with a blog at http://www.website.com/blog/post-name BEGIN WordPress <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | thirdseo
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^index.php$ - [L]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
RewriteRule . /index.php [L]</ifmodule> END WordPress0 -
No equivalent page to re-direct to for highly trafficked pages, what should we do?
We have several old pages on our site that we want to get rid of, but we don't want to 404 them since they have decent traffic numbers. Would it be fine to set up a 301 re-direct from all of these pages to our home page? I know the best option is to find an equivalent page to re-direct to, but there isn't a great equivalent.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0