Referer Spamming

[niceguyeddie]

Since the topic is up, I did a little research on the subject after reading how SEGuru's service works:

backlinks.seguru.net/how_it_works.php

Simply put, we seek out sites that are indexed in major crawling search engines. Not just any sites, but sites that show Top Referrers or maybe they have their website statistics open.
We use numerous search terms within these engines to find up to 1000 listings for each of the terms that would find us that type of site we need to show you as a referrer!

Some interesting reading once you dig into it, but I have to question the relevancy of the returns that you will get.

Here's some reading:

http://www.spywareinfo.com/articles/referer_spam/

http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache...hl=en&ie=UTF-8


It's interesting, because I monitor my referer logs rather closely for other reasons (Public Relations more than anything, because I tend to be misquoted from time to time).

However, I have seen a couple of the entries turn up such as A B L O G etc.

Now for the question. How effective can this be? All you are getting is a link, with no search terms at all. Likewise, the link will probably be on a PR0 - PR2 page since most blogs and sites just show the referer on an article detail site instead of the main page where the PR results would be given higher values. Likewise, the link is not permanent.

Anywho, I was interested in the topic enough to do some copy on the subject and to make a change in Xaraya to get the input and bound back a pst entry for each one made, just to drain a little bandwidth here and there (configurable of course;)

[John Scott]

A few points:

1. Referral logs are most often password protected.

2. Those which aren't password protected usually only list the top referrers - you'd have to be in the top to be listed.

3. Referrer logs contain many, many URL's. If the log contains 300 links, the PageRank is divided amongst that. It is not a quality link.

[John Scott]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...ling.%2Bcom%22

None of those show up as backlinks though.

[niceguyeddie]

Well, blogging seems to be the prime candidates as they often list the last referers into the system. In CMS's there are often stat packages as well that show the referers without the password.

That said, the last point is the best. If the list is divided against low PR, then what is the point? There was at least one person in the other thread that saw improvement, which is surprising to me, but then again if it is not a very utilized form of spamming then I guess it could be effective.

I would think though that a trackback ping via RPC would be a better way to go about this, which would allow you to get keywords mentioned as well.

[niceguyeddie]

http://www.idly.org/2003/11/14/porn_...hind_blogs.php

Another good read

[John Scott]

Some good reading there. Thanks, John.

[Leigh]

.....

[John Scott]

I feel sorry for those bloggers. Must be a shock to visit your own blog and find it linking to some porn site.

Same with the referer logs. It screws up the accuracy of stats.

These links aren't quality links, and Google knows that. GoogleGuy mentioned somewhere that "referer logs and guestbooks don't count".

I doubt it's 100% true, because some sites appear to be on the top of the SERP's from guestbook links, but who knows?

I do know that one site has close to 4,000 referer log links, and PageRank zero.

Google also shows 0 backlinks, so it would appear to be filtering the spammed referer log links.

[Leigh]

.....

[John Scott]

Why did you change from Shal to Leigh?

[Leigh]

.....

[John Scott]

Ok. But I can still call you "Shal", ok?

[Leigh]

.....

[John Scott]

Four letters vs five! And how can I know whether to put the "i" first or the "e"? "Leigh" - it's so confusing.

[Leigh]

.....

[John Scott]

That first one looks like my mom.

[WilliamC]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

A few points:

1. Referral logs are most often password protected.

2. Those which aren't password protected usually only list the top referrers - you'd have to be in the top to be listed.

3. Referrer logs contain many, many URL's. If the log contains 300 links, the PageRank is divided amongst that. It is not a quality link.

Just a few minor points I would like to make here....

1. cpanel may protect theirs, but 99% of the commercial log analysis software out (webalizer, adtracker, Gstats, etc) dont pass protect themselves automatically.

3. most stats programs only show the top x referers (as you stated), so the division point is moot. It is also incorrect and I take it you do not understand how PR actually works... If you question my knowledge of how PR works i might add that I am one of only 3 people who have a 100% working PR generator for mass aquiring PR on a list of domains.

Ahh and you mentioned backlinks before of yer site being 1,600+ in alltheweb. I tried posting there but you locked it to make sure you had the last word obviously. childish at best. but on the backlinks check iconbazaar.com on alltheweb and then gloat to me about your backlinks.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by WilliamC

Ahh and you mentioned backlinks before of yer site being 1,600+ in alltheweb. I tried posting there but you locked it to make sure you had the last word obviously. childish at best. but on the backlinks check iconbazaar.com on alltheweb and then gloat to me about your backlinks.

I did not gloat about my backlinks. I simply stated that your scam artist friend was a liar and incompetent at generating links - at least not as competent as he would have people believe. That's why your friend needed to lie.

[WilliamC]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

I did not gloat about my backlinks. I simply stated that your scam artist friend was a liar and incompetent at generating links - at least not as competent as he would have people believe. That's why your friend needed to lie.

Ahhh so your post is basically admitting I am 100% correct, as you did not attack anything I stated. As for my "friend", I use his domain tool and I have met the man in person I think twice at seminars.