__/ [ John Bokma ] on Monday 13 March 2006 07:35 \__
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> It is probably less likely to work, but does not expose sensitive
>> pages to curious visitors
>
> Such pages should be either behind a password or not on the net. *Never*
> rely on what is nothing more then a hint/suggestion to a friendly crawler.
Yes, of course. However, it is rather safe to assume that a public page,
which contains a viewable frame, will not contain information as sensitive
as passwords.
> An unfriendly crawler can fetch your page and decide to use it to generate
> content, and oops, there is your sensitive information out in the open,
> and maybe even very well ranked in Google.
Well ranked? I am not sure. Unless it resides on your PageRank 7 homepage.
That mall in Mexico which you blogged about might soon make number 1 in
Google, but it will not be the 'official homepage'. Rather, it is one which
contains the picture of chocolate that resembles feces.
Google fell victim to their own thirst for knowledge recently. I wonder how
many people have read these ironic news. I am not talking about Brin in
drag.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Far away from home, robots build people"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
7:55am up 5 days 0:32, 8 users, load average: 0.35, 0.52, 0.57
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
