Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Google search snafu fixed, explained

What started as a normal weekend morning for Internet users turned into a paranoid panic when the Google search engine started reporting that every site - and we mean every site - was contaminated with malware.

To quote my friend Bob, who woke me up this morning at 7 AM with the news, "What the hell?"

It took me a few minutes to determine that while all Google searches were indeed reporting that every site "may harm your computer," this was not really the case. Google was reporting one of my Web sites was potentially filled with malware... and I had taken it down for maintenance the day before. Without any connection to the Internet I knew that server wasn't infected with anything.

After kicking around the Web for an hour or so, I was absolutely sure that it was Google, not the Web, that was in trouble. The logical place where this problem would have erupted was in a Google internal program that marks sites as bad when Google's bots and/or staffers determine that a site is trying to install malicious programs.

At first, Google stated that the problem came from its use of the StopBadware list of bad sites. StopBadware, which is partnership of academic institutions, technology industry leaders, and volunteers that generates its own list of bad sites, denied this. In an official StopBadware blog posting, the group stated that. "Google generates its own list of badware URLs, and no data that we generate is supposed to affect the warnings in Google's search listings."

Google has yet to correct this in its own public statements. Google engineers, however, tell me that StopBadware is correct and that Google generates its own list of suspicious Web sites.

So what did happen? According to a statement by Google's Marissa Mayer, VP of Search Products & User Experience, "Very simply, human error. Google flags search results with the message 'This site may harm your computer' if the site is known to install malicious software in the background or otherwise surreptitiously. We do this to protect our users against visiting sites that could harm their computers."

Specifically, "We periodically receive updates to that list and received one such update to release on the site this morning. Unfortunately (and here's the human error), the URL of '/' was mistakenly checked in as a value to the file and '/' expands to all URLs."

In other words, a single point of failure lead to Google search being rendered useless this morning. Mayer went on to write, "Fortunately, our on-call site reliability team found the problem quickly and reverted the file. Since we push these updates in a staggered and rolling fashion, the errors began appearing between 6:27 a.m. and 6:40 a.m. and began disappearing between 7:10 and 7:25 a.m., so the duration of the problem for any particular user was approximately 40 minutes."

With this correction, Google search should now be working normally for everyone. If you run into a search result that states that "This site may harm your computer," you can be reasonably sure that it is really a malicious site and you should avoid it.

What People Are Saying

Typo

I think you meant to say, "a single point of failure led" in the next-to-last paragraph.

Not just that..

Google is becoming more and more invasive and
annoying. Today, I noticed when I open a new
tab in Firefox, an unusual looking Google page
shows up, even though I have my new tabs set
to show a blank page. I had to set my home
page as "about:blank" to stop this from
happening! Then there was the annoyance of
trying to get rid of Google toolbar from my
Firefox under Linux. Every time it was removed
it put itself back. I ended up just disabling
the toolbar. If Firefox is going to keep helping
Google pull this crap, Firefox will be removed
from all of my machines!

malware

I started seeing warnings that my site was infected yesterday evening. I'm not a web genius, but I looked throughout my site and could find nothing suspicious.

However, I'm still getting the warning. Google promised to revisit my site in a few weeks, but I'm quite unhappy about visitors being told that my home site is an "attack site".

I don't think they've fixed their problem yet, or else they will have to be more specific about what they have found on my site (that I cannot see).

Til then, I'm quite upset with Google.

nothing compares to this absurd Google Analytics error

Wrongly labeling all legitimate sites in the world as dangerous to user computers is penny-ante stuff.

Another error that Google has sat on was a snaffu in Google Analytics (GA) that corrupted all data for any sites using segments.

GA started reporting laughable figures like 0.04 pages per visit (yes, not a typo... and when Google Support got a ticket they were AFRONTED we could doubt that GA is always right) meaning people visited and saw less than one page per visit.

It is alleged that GA fixed this with a change to _setVar as of Jan 27, but considering they compleltely messed up average bounce rates, time on page, visits, and basically everything until now, you be the judge.

------------------------------------
Dear Google Analytics User,
As an Administrative user on an account that is currently using custom visitor segments in Google Analytics, we would like to inform you of some changes to the _setVar method and its impact on bounce rate and time on page metrics. Starting Wednesday, January 27, 2009 a call to the _setVar method will no longer be counted as an interaction hit with the result that you may see higher bounce rates and more accurate time on page metrics in your reports.
What is the change?
Google Analytics calculates bounces and durations based upon interaction hits. Previously, user-defined calls have been classified as an interaction. With this change, _setVar will no longer be considered an interaction hit. Interaction hits will now only include pageviews, events, transactions and experiments (such as with Google Website Optimizer).
Why will bounce rates go up?
Single-page visits that had previously been hidden due to the _ setVar call will now appear. For example, let's say that you've used the _setVar method to segment member vs. non-member site visitors. Previously, if a visitor came to your site and triggered the _setVar call, but viewed only one page, this would not be counted as a bounce. With this change the user defined call will not send an interaction hit and overall bounce rates will increase as this single page visit will properly be counted as a bounce.
What is the impact on the time on page metric?
Time on page metrics are normally counted by the difference in time stamps which are set by interaction hits. Prior to this change, using _setVar would cause Google Analytics to calculate the time on page metric between the time of the pageview hit and the interaction hit of the user defined variable. Now, as user-defined hits are no longer counted as an interaction hit, time on page metrics should more accurately reflect the time between one pageview and the next.
We've made these changes based on comments from our users and have listened to your feedback to not have bounce rates be affected by custom visitor segments. We work constantly to improve Google Analytics to meet our customer needs and to provide the most powerful and accurate web analytics possible.
Sincerely,
The Google Analytics Team