Project Pagerank 10

Before explaining the used techniques, it agrees to remember that the content of this article is solely of informative character and that we will not be responsible, under no circumstance, by the manipulation that you prune to make in the results of Google or any other motor search.

Chronology:
* 1 December 2004: beginning of script that allows to obtain the wished Pagerank.
* 16 December 2004: obtaining of our first Pagerank 10.
* 19 December 2004: publication of ours first works on the Pagerank.
* Until today: test and observation of the behavior of the finders, reading of the reactions in forums FR, U.S., IS, DK, RU, etc.

Objective: To demonstrate the existence of a critical fault in the system of Pagerank and to include/understand the consequences that can cause this fault. This vulnerability exists for but of a year, we wished that Google© solves this bug that webmasters affects, motor companies, individuals, SEO and... search.

Concept: These faults made their appearance at the beginning of the 2004. In February of that year we realized that to make wild redirections towards other sites had by consequence generating strange behaviors of Googlebot and the pages of results of Google. All the types of redirections are concerned:

• Redirection 301 : Moved Permanently
• Redirection 302 : Moved Temporarily
• Meta-Refresh à 0 segundos
• Iframes, frames et javascript

Each one of these redirections, according to the popularity of the emitting page of the redirection, can have enormous consequences on the "objective" of the redirection. The Pagerank word does not mean anything nowadays, or yes indeed, it has several meanings that there are to distinguish clearly:

* the Pagerank that the navigator indicates by means of the calculation of the checksum (IE or FF): this one corresponds to an old Pagerank that is updated of sporadic way.
* the Pagerank of the Google directory: DMOZ.
* "the real" Pagerank, that used by Google of way hidden in its sort algorithm.

---------------------

Impact on the Motors search: :

+
In order to index a new site, if we have the PR10, and that we cleared it once obtained, it seems that these new sites are not affected by the effect sandbox.

We have not wanted to prove the following thing, but what it would happen if we placed robots.txt Disallow:/ in the root directory of our redirigido site PR 10 to Google.com and that later we go to Google Remove to update this robots.txt in 24H? Google "autodesposicionaría"?
-
It allows to make disappear a competitor with an elevated popularity less than the page that has the redirection. (It can be also considered like an advantage:p)

Some types of redirections allow to interchange the positions with those of their competitor. Thus a competitor better positioned on certain word-key "would be destroyed" with a simple redirection.

Within the framework of interchange of connections, anyone can then simulate Web sites with a PR 5.6.7 or 8 to negotiate with advantage I connect more interesting... If we consider the attitude of some webmasters that they prefer to concentrate itself on the PR instead of the content, it will be important in the successive thing to directly verify the good PR of the site in google.

--------------------

Some techniques that we have still imagined have been proven, the only immediate consequences have been those to suppress to the pages of the site www.pr10.darkseoteam.com anticipated to obtain a PR4, PR3, PR2, PR2 ET PR0. These pages, when having a little Pagerank, ran the risk of disappearing during the test, reason for which we have suppressed them.

As far as the frequency of visits of the robot of Google, this one corresponds to the true Pagerank of your site. A page PR10 more will not be visited nor better classified. The linkeadas pages do not receive any transmission of the PR10, since as you see it in script attached, we simulated the fact of being one another page Web, and in our case, we have made think to Google... that we were Google (since Sam has remarcado; -)).

In agreement with our observations, it seems that the label puts-refresh also disturbs to Yahoo! that it loses the head with type directors: site:site1.com that it indicates in the list of results of the pages of site1 the URL of www.site2.com towards which site1 has done a redirection (is clear? ;p).

As far as the Vista question in the forum of how we could take advantage of this bug? the solution resides certainly in the fact of being able to leave thanks to this "trick" sandbox and of being able to indicate the wished PR. Nevertheless, their consequences are ominous. , thus numerous webmasters is amused with this type of consequences. In special, we must grant a red fine cardboard to certain societies of affiliation that work solely with this type of redirections, and that take advantage of it to position their connection of redirection (with the pretext of not controlling this phenomenon). The danger is great for each one of us, webmasters, companies, societies of services, etc, we are put under the will of Google that is who decides to what page must assign the content of the redirections.

Most dangerous in terms of "robbery" of Pagerank and position it is the label puts-refresh and the groups iframes, frameset and Javascript that allow all the worse one and than seem irreversible at the moment. Redirections 301 and 302 are also dangerous, but with the retirement of the redirections, the situation returns to normality after a certain term of time.

We have made wait for much them, there am the used code here:

// Dark Seo Team Powered
Cloakin' Stuff // -> MakeYouWorkALittle (-;
if (GooglebotStealMyPage&Content)
{       // Code only for Google

 header("Status: 301 Moved Permanently");
 header("Location: http://www.google.com");
 exit();

}
else {
echo "I Steal His PR""; // visual page for all
// copy here all cool stuff u want
}
?>