Internet marketing and online advertising campaigns with experienced advertising agency for Internet promotion.
12 Jun
On the World Wide Web, a link farm is any group of web pages that all hyperlink to every other page in the group. Although some link farms can be created by hand, most are created through automated programs and services. A link farm is a form of spamming the index of a search engine (sometimes called spamdexing).
Link farms were developed by search engine optimizers in 1999 to take advantage of the Inktomi search engine’s dependence upon link popularity. Although link popularity is used by some search engines to help establish a ranking order for search results, the Inktomi engine at the time maintained two indexes. Search results were produced from the primary index which was limited to approximately 100,000,000 listings. Pages with few inbound links continually fell out of the Inktomi index on a monthly basis.
Inktomi was targeted for manipulation through link farms because it was then used by several independent but popular search engines, such as HotBot. Yahoo!, then the most popular search service, also used Inktomi results to supplement its directory search feature. The link farms helped stabilize listings for (normally) online business Web sites that had few natural links from larger more stable sites in the Inktomi index.
Link farm exchanges were at first handled on an informal basis, but several service companies were founded to provide automated registration, categorization, and link page updates to member Web sites.
When the Google search engine became popular, search engine optimizers learned that Google’s ranking algorithm depended in part on a link weighting scheme called PageRank. Rather than simply count all inbound links equally, the PageRank algorithm determines that some links may be more valuable than others, and therefore assigns them more weight than others. Link farming was adapted to help increase the PageRank of member pages.
However, even the link farms became susceptible to manipulation by unscrupulous Webmasters who joined the services, received inbound linkage, and then found ways to hide their outbound links or to avoid posting any links on their sites at all. Link farm managers had to implement quality controls and monitor member compliance with their rules to ensure fairness.
Alternative link farm products emerged, particularly link-finding software that identified potential reciprocal link partners, sent them template-based emails offering to exchange links, and create directory-like link pages for Web sites hoping to build their link popularity and PageRank.
Search engines countered the link farm movement by identifying specific attributes associated with link farm pages and filtering those pages from indexing and search results. In some cases, entire domains were removed from the search engine indexes in order to prevent them from influencing search results.
The justification for link farm-influenced crawling diminished proportionately as the search engines expanded their capacities to index more sites. Once the 500,000,000 listing threshold was crossed, link farms became unnecessary for helping sites stay in primary indexes. Inktomi’s technology, now a part of Yahoo!, now indexes billions of Web pages and uses them to offer its search results.
Where link weighting is still believed by some Webmasters to influence search engine results with Google, Yahoo!, MSN, and Ask (among others), link farms remain a popular tool for increasing PageRank or perceived equivalent values. PageRank-like measurements apply only to the individual pages being linked to (typically the reciprocal linking pages on member sites), so these pages must in turn link out to other pages (such as the main index pages of the member sites) in order for the link weighting to help.
The expression “link farm” is now considered to be pejorative and derogatory. Many reciprocal link management service operators tout the value of their resource management and direct networking relationship building. The reciprocal link management services promote their industry as an alternative to search engines for finding and attracting visitors to Web sites. Their acceptance is by no means universal but the link management services seem to have established a stable customer base.
Google indicates in its Webmaster Guidelines that more than 100 factors are used to determine search results rankings. There is considerable debate in the search engine optimization community regarding the continued value of PageRank. Mike Grehan, a well-known search engine optimization columnist, has publicly quoted engineers from Yahoo! and Ask who say Google never fully implemented their PageRank algorithm.
Search engines such as Google recommend that webmasters request relevant links to their sites (conduct a link campaign), but avoid participating in link farms. According to Google, a site that participates in a link farm may have its search rankings penalized.
Search engines try to identify specific attributes associated with link farm pages and filter those pages from indexing and search results. In some cases, entire domains are removed from the search engine indexes in order to prevent them from influencing search results.
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
4 Sep
In the late 19th Century Western Union allowed telegraphic messages on its network to be sent to multiple destinations. Up until the Great Depression wealthy North American residents would be deluged with nebulous investment offers. This problem never fully emerged in Europe to the degree that it did in the Americas, because telegraphy was regulated by national post offices in the European region.
Although spamming has existed on the Internet since as early as 1978, the first major spamming incidents didn’t take place until the early 1990s.
Spamming began becoming a major problem at the same time that the Internet began its exponential mainstream expansion in 1993 (also known as Eternal September). More recently, Tim Roarty, using the tag tjroar, spammed across so many internet forums with such a high rate of posting that he is credited with a slow down in overall internet speed. Most major forums have disabled the ability to register as tjroar on their forum due to this problem. It is suspected taht tjroar was a collection of irc trojans and they trolled the internet to sign up for forums – fortunately the creator is unable to modify them and they only try to sign up as the user name “tjroar”.
The term spam is widely believed to have derived from the SPAM sketch of the BBC television comedy series “Monty Python’s Flying Circus”.
The sketch features a small restaurant in which every item on the menu includes SPAM canned meat, and a chorus of Vikings drowning out all conversation with a song consisting almost entirely of the word “SPAM.”
This guide is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
18 Aug
Spamming remains a hot discussion topic. In fact, many online users have even suggested (though they were presumably joking) that cruel forms of capital punishment would be appropriate for spammers. In 2004, the seized Porsche of an indicted spammer was advertised on the internet; this revealed the extent of the financial rewards available to those who are willing to commit duplicitous acts online. However, some of the possible means used to stop spamming may lead to other side effects, such as increased government control over the Net, loss of privacy, barriers to free expression, and even the commercialization of e-mail.
One of the chief values favored by many long-time Internet users and experts, as well as by many members of the public, is the free exchange of ideas. Many have valued the relative anarchy of the Internet, and bridle at the idea of restrictions placed upon it. A common refrain from spam-fighters is that spamming itself abridges the historical freedom of the Internet, by attempting to force users to carry the costs of material which they would not choose.
An ongoing concern expressed by parties such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU has to do with so-called “stealth blocking”, a term for ISPs employing aggressive spam blocking without their users’ knowledge. These groups’ concern is that ISPs or technicians seeking to reduce spam-related costs may select tools which (either through error or design) also block non-spam e-mail from sites seen as “spam-friendly”. SPEWS is a common target of these criticisms. Few object to the existence of these tools; it is their use in filtering the mail of users who are not informed of their use which draws fire.
Some see spam-blocking tools as a threat to free expression—and laws against spamming as an untoward precedent for regulation or taxation of e-mail and the Internet at large. Even though it is possible in some jurisdictions to treat some spam as unlawful merely by applying existing laws against trespass and conversion, some laws specifically targeting spam have been proposed. In 2004, United States passed the Can Spam Act of 2003 which provided ISPs with tools to combat spam. This act allowed Yahoo! to successfully sue Eric Head, reportedly one of the biggest spammers in the world, who settled the lawsuit for several thousand U.S. dollars in June 2004. But the law is criticized by many for not being effective enough. Indeed, the law was supported by some spammers and organizations which support spamming, and opposed by many in the antispam community. Examples of effective anti-abuse laws that respect free speech rights include those in the U.S. against unsolicited faxes and phone calls, and those in Australia and a few U.S. states against spam.
Attorney Laurence Canter was disbarred by the Supreme Court of Tennessee in 1997 for sending prodigious amounts of spam advertising his immigration law practice.
Robert Soloway lost a case in a federal court against the operator of a small Oklahoma-based Internet service provider who accused him of spamming. In another case against Soloway, U.S. Judge Ralph G. Thompson granted a motion by plaintiff Robert Braver for a default judgment and permanent injunction against him. The judgment includes a statutory damages award of $10,075,000 under Oklahoma law.
In the first successful case of its kind, Mr. Nigel Roberts from the Channel Islands won £270 against Media Logistics UK who sent junk e-mails to his personal account. [15]
This guide is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
25 Jun
The term “spamming” is also used in the older sense of something repetitious and disruptive by players of various video games, most often first-person shooters or fighting games. For shooters, it refers to “area denial” tactics—repeatedly firing rockets or other explosive shells into an area—or to any tactic whereby a large volume of ammunition is expended in the hope of either scoring chance hits, covering teammates’ advance with suppressive fire, or clearing or defending an area from an enemy presence. In fighting games, spamming most often refers to overuse of particularly powerful moves, especially if they are easy to execute.
Whether such tactics are viewed as cheating or abusive varies from game to game, community to community. Analogous to camping, the tactical advantage gained by those thus engaged is the crux of the issue. If every player defensively “spams”, and no one makes the offensive push, there will be no opportunities for players to come into conflict, and thus there will be no game. Games like Capture the Flag help to break this deadlock by providing incentive to invade enemy territory, however risky.
Conversely, the same term may be used to describe those who flood the in-game chat with needlessly profuse and/or frequent messaging, similar to messaging spam mentioned above. Although perceptions vary within the gaming community, in most arenas excessive messaging is unwelcome. On the other hand, in the role-playing games MUD, MUSH, and MUCK, players happily continue using the word in this original sense, with no implication of abuse. When a player returns to the terminal after a brief break to find his or her screen wonderfully filled with pages of random chat, it’s still called “spam”. [13]
SPAM could also be taken to mean a set of humorous English backronyms, including: Short/Stupid/Silly Particularly/Pointless Annoying Messages, Self-Promotional Advertising Material, Self Propelled Automatic Mail, Send Post All Members, Sending Persistently Annoying Mail, and Shit Posing As Mail.
This guide is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
10 Jun
The term spam is derived from the Monty Python SPAM sketch, set in a cafe where everything on the menu includes SPAM luncheon meat. As the server recites the SPAM-filled menu, presently a chorus of Viking patrons drowns out all normal conversation with a song, repeating “SPAM, SPAM, SPAM, SPAM” and singing “lovely SPAM, wonderful SPAM” over and over again, stopping all conversation, hence SPAMming the dialogue. The excessive amount of SPAM in the sketch comes from British rationing in World War II. SPAM was one of the few foods that was not restricted and widely available, so by the time of the sketch, the British were fed up with the luncheon meat. Another similarity is that everything on the menu comes with SPAM, therefore representing that you can’t order something without receiving something you don’t want, much like one can’t be active on the Internet and never have spam sent to your e-mail address(es).
Although the first known instance of unsolicited commercial e-mail occurred in 1978 (unsolicited electronic messaging had already taken place over other media, with the first recorded instance being via telegram on September 13, 1904), the term “spam” for this practice had not yet been applied. In the 1980s the term was adopted to describe certain abusive users who frequented BBSs and MUDs, who would repeat “SPAM” a huge number of times to scroll other users’ text off the screen. In the early Chat rooms in services like PeopleLink and the early days of AOL, they actually flooded the screen with sizeable quotes from the Monty Python routine. This was generally used as a tactic by insiders of a particular group who wanted to drive newcomers out of the room so the usual conversation could continue. This act, previously termed flooding or trashing, came to be called spamming as well. [1] By analogy, the term was soon applied to any large amount of text broadcast by one user, or sometimes by many users.
It later came to be used on Usenet to mean excessive multiple posting—the repeated posting of the same message. The first evident usage of this sense was by Joel Furr in the aftermath of the ARMM incident of March 31, 1993, in which a piece of experimental software released dozens of recursive messages onto the news.admin.policy newsgroup. Soon, this use had also become established—to spam Usenet was to flood newsgroups with junk messages.
Commercial spamming started in force on March 5, 1994, when a pair of lawyers, Laurence Canter and Martha Siegel, began using bulk Usenet posting to advertise immigration law services. The incident was commonly termed the “Green Card spam”, after the subject line of the postings. The two went on to widely promote spamming of both Usenet and e-mail as a new means of advertisement—over the objections of Internet users they labeled “anti-commerce radicals.” Within a few years, the focus of spamming (and antispam efforts) moved chiefly to e-mail, where it remains today. [2]
There are three popular fake etymologies of the word “spam”. The first, promulgated by Canter & Siegel themselves, is that “spamming” is what happens when one dumps a can of SPAM luncheon meat into a fan blade. The second is the backronym “shit posing as mail.” The third is similar, using “stupid pointless annoying messages.”
Hormel Foods Corporation, the makers of SPAM® luncheon meat, do not object to the Internet use of the term “spamming.” However, they do ask that the capitalized word “SPAM” be reserved to refer to their product and trademark. [3] By and large, this request is obeyed in forums which discuss spam—to the extent that to write “SPAM” for “spam” brands the writer as a newbie. However, Hormel has begun to press the trademark issue—first, when a firm registered the trademark “SpamArrest” in 2003, Hormel sued to invalidate the mark, [4], and more recently two failed attempts to revoke the mark “spambuster”.[5], [6]
This guide is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
4 May
E-mail and other forms of spamming have been used for purposes other than advertisements. Many early Usenet spams were religious or political in nature. Serdar Argic, for instance, spammed Usenet with historical revisionist screeds. A number of evangelists have spammed Usenet and e-mail media with preaching messages. A growing number of criminals are also using spam to perpetrate various sorts of fraud, and in some cases have used it to lure people to locations where they have been kidnapped, held for ransom and even murdered [1].
Spamming has also been used as a denial of service (“DoS”) tactic, particularly on Usenet. By overwhelming the readers of a newsgroup with an inordinate number of nonsense messages, legitimate messages can be lost and computing resources are consumed. Since these messages are usually forged (that is, sent falsely under regular posters’ names) this tactic has come to be known as sporgery (from spam + forgery). This tactic has for instance been used by partisans of the Church of Scientology against the alt.religion.scientology newsgroup (see Scientology vs. the Internet) and by spammers against news.admin.net-abuse.email, a forum for mail administrators to discuss spam problems. Applied to e-mail, this is termed mailbombing. The Usenet Meow Wars (circa 1996) were DoS attacks on various newsgroups aimed at specific posters, thus disrupting the newsgroups where they were active. The DoS attacks launched by Hipcrime, which continue today, are more specifically crafted as DoS attacks on entire newsgroups. The alt.sex newsgroups were rendered virtually uninhabitable by commercial porn site spammers, partially for advertising purposes and partially to destroy a perceived free competitor. (This spawned the creation of the moderated, unspammable soc.sexuality newsgroups.)
In a handful of cases, forged e-mail spam has been used as a tool of harassment. The spammer collects a list of addresses as usual, then sends a spam to them signed with the name of the person he wishes to harass. Some recipients, angry that they received spam and seeing an obvious “source”, will respond angrily or pursue various sorts of revenge against the apparent spammer, the forgery victim. A widely known victim of this sort of harassment was Joe’s CyberPost, which has lent its name to the offense: it is known as a joe job. Such joe jobs have been most often used against antispammers: in more recent examples, Steve Linford of Spamhaus Project and Timothy Walton, a California attorney, have been targeted. Sometimes victims (such as ROKSO-listed spammers) are subscribed to lists that don’t practice verified opt-in, such as magazine subscriptions and e-mail newsletters, a practise known as subscriptionbombing.
Spammers have also abused resources set up for purposes of anonymous speech online, such as anonymous remailers. As a result, many of these resources have been shut down, denying their utility to legitimate users.
E-mail worms or viruses may be spammed to set up an initial pool of infected machines, which then resend the virus to other machines in a spam-like manner. The infected machines can often be used as remote-controlled zombie computers, for more conventional spamming or DDoS attacks. Sometimes trojans are spammed to phish for bank account details, or to set up a pool of zombies without using a virus.
This guide is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
17 Apr
The most common purpose for spamming is advertising. Goods commonly advertised in spam include pornography, unlicensed computer software, medical products such as Viagra, credit card accounts, and fad products. In part because of the bad reputation (and dubious legal status) which spamming carries, it is chiefly used to carry offers of an ill-reputed or legally questionable nature. Many of the products advertised in spam are fraudulent in nature, such as quack medications and get-rich-quick schemes. Spam is frequently used to advertise scams, such as diploma mills, advance fee fraud, pyramid schemes, stock pump-and-dump schemes, and phishing. It is also often used to advertise pornography without regard to the age of the recipient, or the legality of such material in the recipient’s location.
One of the most common ad spams is the computer software program GAIN. Also known as Gator or Claria or Dashbar, this insidious program hides itself within the active programs running on your computer and will collect information on internet habits. Based on the websites you visit, it will then send you “relevant” advertising at random intervals. Unfortunately, this program is often attached and automatically installed with popular “free” software, such as many P2P filesharing clients. Even removing GAIN from your computer can sometimes prove difficult, as it leaves traces of itself even after uninstallation or removal by third party spyware programs.
Spam has different levels of acceptability in different countries. For example, in Russia spamming is commonly used by many mainstream legitimate businesses, such as travel agencies, printing shops, training centers, real estate agencies, seminar and conference organizers, and even self-employed electricians and garbage collection companies. In fact, the most prominent Russian spammer was American English Center, a language school in Moscow. That spamming sparked a powerful antispam movement by enraging the Deputy Minister of Communications Andrey Korotkov and provoking a wave of counterattacks on the spammer through non-Internet channels, including a massive telephone DDOS (Distributed Denial of Service) attack.
This guide is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
Need an webmaster? Click HERE
15 Apr
Because the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 authorizes an USD 11,000 penalty per violation for spamming each individual recipient, many commercial e-mail marketers within the United States utilize a service or special software that helps ensure compliance with the Act. A variety of older systems exist which do not ensure compliance with the Act. To comply with the Act’s regulation of commercial e-mail, services typically: require users to authenticate their return address and include a valid physical address, provide a one-click unsubscribe feature, and prohibit importing lists of purchased addresses which may not have given valid permission.
In addition to satisfying legal requirements, services such as ConstantContact help customers to set up and manage their own e-mail marketing campaigns. The services provide e-mail templates, automatically handle subscriptions and removals, and generate statistics on how many messages were received and openned, and whether the recipients clicked on any links within the messages.
This guide is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
Need an webmaster? Click HERE
7 Apr
Spamdexing (a portmanteau of spamming and indexing) refers to the practice on the World Wide Web of deliberately modifying HTML pages to increase the chance of them being placed high on search engine relevancy lists. People who do this are called search engine spammers. In layman’s terms, spamdexing is using unethical means known as “black hat seo techniques” to unfairly increase the rank of sites in search engines. When a website is optimized to be indexable by a search engine, without trying to deceive its web crawler, this is called search engine optimization. To be sure, there is much gray area between white-hat search engine optimization and black-hat spamdexing.
Google’s PageRank system uses the number of links to a page as an index of its “importance”. Ordinarily, very few pages will link to a spammer’s commercial site, because it is of no interest to anyone else, and hence it will have a very low PageRank score. To counter this effect, spammers attempt to create links to their sites on other people’s pages.
The most common targets for this kind of spam are weblogs, the spamming then being known as blog spam, or “blam” for short. In 2003, this type of spam took advantage of the open nature of comments in the blogging software Movable Type by repeatedly placing comments to various blog posts that provided nothing more than a link to the spammer’s commercial web site. [3]
Similar attacks are often performed against wikis and guestbooks, both of which accept user contributions; something that consistantly impresses and confounds critics of Wikipedia is its remarkable lack of spam, in spite of having nearly one million articles and over two million pages.
On January 18, 2005, Google proposed a rel="nofollow" attribute that could be placed on a link; doing so instructs most major search engines to ignore the link, rendering it useless to spammers. Software is then rewritten to add this attribute to any link embedded in a comment. As of April 2005, nofollow has seen expanding usage, but is not yet universal. [4]
As well as comment forms, editable pages and guestbooks, some sites publish a list of the most common referrers to their site in order to show how readers have found it. These lists have also been exploited by spammers with so-called referer spam, in which the spammer makes repeated web site requests using a fake referer URL pointing to a spam-advertised site. That URL will later appear as a link on the site, boosting the PageRank of its target.
This guide is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
Need an webmaster? Click HERE
Recent Comments