google search

stinkydiver60

I did a google search on my full name and the link to my smugmug site came up. Can I prevent this?

Dna

Yes. Tell Google not to index your site.

http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/topic.py?topic=8459

Andrew

Andy

stinkydiver60 wrote:

I did a google search on my full name and the link to my smugmug site came up. Can I prevent this?

Yes, you can - you must put in a site-wide password on your site:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/site-security

TheDuck

Why Does Smugmug force allowing bots?

Andy wrote:

Yes, you can - you must put in a site-wide password on your site:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/site-security

This issue is coming up frequently on many threads. The issues are that (1) significant smugmug features are lost/forfeited when using passwords and/or private galleries, and (2) smugmug apparently purposefully disables allowing custom HTML code that would otherwise tell search bots to back off...and even if smugmug adhered to standard web protocol re: bots, smugmug standard accounts would not be able to use HTML customization to protect our familes.

Why, Andy, does Smugmug override the HTML code to allow bots to index photos? I understand that pros want exposure...but clearly family accounts do NOT want pervs trolling their cute kids.

Thanks,
The Duck

Andy

TheDuck wrote:

.but clearly family accounts do NOT want pervs trolling their cute kids.

Thanks,
The Duck

Actually there are MANY "family" accounts that do want to be found. There's no one-size fits all situation, I'm sorry to say.

That's why we have site protection, Duck.

Rando

Dna wrote:

Yes. Tell Google not to index your site.

http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/topic.py?topic=8459

Andrew

This does NOT work for smugmug for two reasons (and your smugmug galleries will never get de-indexed):
1. smugmug doesn't allow you to control the robots.txt file
2. smugmug forces the meta tag:
META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="ALL, INDEX, FOLLOW"
which conflicts if you add the required meta tag to remove:
META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW"

This is what you SHOULD have done to prevent your smugmug from getting indexed (doesn't help now, but good to know):
1. Made your galleries private from the get go
2. Not use your real name anywhere in your smugmug (display name, nick name, etc)
3. If posting pics in forums, you should have used the hide owner feature (dgrin gets indexed heavily)
4. Do not put your smugmug nickname/site in your dgrin profile

Doing these will NOT help get you de-indexed:
1. Changing your nickname, OLDNICK.smugmug.com just gets forwarded to NEWNICK.smugmug.com (for everything, your homepage, galleries, photos, etc)
2. Changing a once public gallery to private doesn't help. Google has the link to your private gallery.
3. Renaming galleries don't work
4. Moving photos from one gallery to another doesn't work
5. Password protecting prevents people from looking but won't get you de-indexed because it still goes to a valid webpage
6. Getting power accts and pro-accts to customize html won't help either (see above)

The only things YOU can do to assure google's search results go to a dead page:
1. Delete your galleries (and re-upload to a new gallery)
2. Delete your smugmug account

This issue has been going on for years. It's apparent there's an emphasis on page ranking rather than on privacy.

Andy

Rando wrote:

This issue has been going on for years. It's apparent there's an emphasis on page ranking rather than on privacy.

I do not think this is fair at all. In fact, it's just plain untrue.

Still, we are listening to all of these comments, and we'll see what can be done to make it more obvious about what public and private means.

Thanks for posting!

caroline

Rando wrote:

This is what you SHOULD have done to prevent your smugmug from getting indexed (doesn't help now, but good to know):

4. Do not put your smugmug nickname/site in your dgrin profile
.

So if I change my dgrin profile now does that mean that no more of my postings in dgrin will be indexed back to me ? I don't like the idea of my dumb questions popping up in google.

Caroline

Andy

caroline wrote:

So if I change my dgrin profile now does that mean that no more of my postings in dgrin will be indexed back to me ? I don't like the idea of my dumb questions popping up in google.

Caroline

We've seen this before, by other photographers. My feeling - who cares? Your clients expect that you are a photographer, not a web designer. I wouldn't worry, but that's just my opinion.

caroline

Andy wrote:

We've seen this before, by other photographers. My feeling - who cares? Your clients expect that you are a photographer, not a web designer. I wouldn't worry, but that's just my opinion.

Ok, opinion respected, I guess the answer is "don't ask the dumb questions"

Andy

caroline wrote:

Ok, opinion respected, I guess the answer is "don't ask the dumb questions"

Nah it's not dumb at all. And you surely can remove your link, no worries.

Andy

After more feedback from you guys, and others, we worked on some more help pages this week and just released them to the live site.

Your Account: Privacy Please:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/private-photo-storage

Linked from: http://www.smugmug.com/help/new-user-crash-course.mg


Thanks everyone for letting us know how important it is to you!

dmc

Andy wrote:

After more feedback from you guys, and others, we worked on some more help pages this week and just released them to the live site.

Your Account: Privacy Please:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/private-photo-storage

Linked from: http://www.smugmug.com/help/new-user-crash-course.mg


Thanks everyone for letting us know how important it is to you!

The recommendations include

• Do not put your last name on your SmugMug account.

But you don't mention that the last name we provide when signing up for a smugmug account is searchable via Smugmug search. We can't sign up with a fake name, and still use a credit card to pay, can we? You should make people aware that doing a Smugmug search on their last name WILL bring up their account, regardless of what their nickname is. (of course a password can stop entry I suppose)

OneThumb confirms this here:
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=307475&postcount=8

I don't like it... if folks want their lastname searched, they can put it all over their site... when I sign up for any service on the web, I have to use my real name, address, credit card, etc... I don't expect the site to allow searching for it.

Go to www.smugmug.com and type your lastname in the search field, what happens?

TheDuck

Are you joking???

Andy wrote:

After more feedback from you guys, and others, we worked on some more help pages this week and just released them to the live site.

Your Account: Privacy Please:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/private-photo-storage

Linked from: http://www.smugmug.com/help/new-user-crash-course.mg


Thanks everyone for letting us know how important it is to you!

Is this a joke? Your new "help" page, specifically says that "Perhaps you've recently robbed a bank and have pictures of the loot in your SmugMug site" as the probable reason for not wanting to be on search engines.

Have you ever read of the Lindburgh baby kidnapping (and murder)? Have you seen the houses of wealthy folks from that era? Are you even remotely aware of the concerns that wealthy folks today have of kidnappings and extortion? Do you remember the more recent [SIZE=-1]JonBenét Ramsey child beauty murder?[/SIZE]

Andy - you should be ashamed of yourself for being so flippant about people wanting to share photos with family and friends, but not internet strangers. I am not a pro - I don't want search engines finding photos of my very cute kids, nor my very cute 14yo niece in her swim suit.

Your "help" page update fails to mention that Smugmug purposefully overrides any effort to comply with Google's suggestions to stop search bots - you FORCE the searches to find our sites. You've never yet answered my questions as to WHY you do this.

I'd put my review of Zenfolio on hold, believing that Smugmug was truly listening. Well, listen to this - you have insulted me and you've insulted my family.

Next Wednesday, I am on the agenda to a group of 2,500 families to explain what I've learned about the dangers of internet photo sharing, and what solutions are available. I'll be sure to update my Powerpoint slides to include Smugmug's views of our concerns.

Smug indeed. Perhaps you should rename Smugmug to Snidemug.

Duck out.

jfriend

Why not allow us to turn robots off?

Andy wrote:

After more feedback from you guys, and others, we worked on some more help pages this week and just released them to the live site.

Your Account: Privacy Please:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/private-photo-storage

Linked from: http://www.smugmug.com/help/new-user-crash-course.mg


Thanks everyone for letting us know how important it is to you!

Andy, one answer we've never, ever gotten here on dgrin is why Smugmug doesn't let those of us with customization change the robot designations. If you just made that customizable along with the other page customizations, it would allow us to tell google to stop indexing us. This is a common request and I don't ever recall getting an answer for why this isn't offered.

We don't want site passwords. We just don't want Google indexing. We're not looking for true security in this regard, just to have us stop appearing in the main search engines which all respect the robot directives.

This would be soooo simple ever since you allowed site customization. Why can't we have this?

TheDuck

EVERYONE should be concerned
Upon re-reading my last post, I regret the elitist tone it conveys. I did not mean to imply that only the children and families of wealthy people are placed at risk by flippant corporate attitudes.

In California, all anyone with children needs to do is go to http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/ - "this site will provide you with access to information on more than 63,000 persons required to register in California as sex offenders".

In my own state, it is truly frightening how many school coaches, teachers and other authority figures are reported in the daily newspapers to have molested children who trusted them.

Everyone...whether we are wealthy, middle class, or working two jobs to pay rent, should be concerned about strangers oogling our children and finding the addresses for our children.

I do not regret my angry tone at Snidemug's flippant response to legitimate concerns, but I do truly apologize for any implication that only wealthy parents need be concerned for their children.

Best regards to all parents,
The Duck

Andy

TheDuck wrote:

Is this a joke?

Hi Duck - Ouch, I see that you are upset- I'll be sure that Anne McBean, who writes our pages, sees this. We'll certainly take your comments to heart, thanks for posting them.

I'd put my review of Zenfolio on hold, believing that Smugmug was truly listening. Well, listen to this - you have insulted me and you've insulted my family.

I'm sorry you feel insulted - that surely was not our intent. We'd love to see your review, either way!

Andy

TheDuck wrote:

I do not regret my angry tone at Snidemug's flippant response to legitimate concerns, but I do truly apologize for any implication that only wealthy parents need be concerned for their children.

Best regards to all parents,
The Duck

You certainly are entitled to your opinion, Duck, but you really don't know us very well, I'm sorry. If you did, you'd know that many of us personally involve ourselves with the authorities, in our own time, to help combat the sort of thing you accuse us of being "snide" about.

Your words and points will carry much more weight when they are presented in a more civil manner.

Thanks.

Andy

TheDuck wrote:

mug's flippant response to legitimate concerns,

Hm, seems to me that we acted, and rather fast, too. I'm sorry you don't like the way we did it. We'll certainly take your comments to heart.

Andy

jfriend wrote:

Andy, one answer we've never, ever gotten here on dgrin is why Smugmug doesn't let those of us with customization change the robot designations.

Hi John, thanks for posting. Onethumb has technical reasons, that's all I know - wish I had a better answer, I really do. Sorry.

Andy

dmc wrote:

. We can't sign up with a fake name, and still use a credit card to pay, can we?

Any name will do. Change it if you like right now.

I just signed up http://anonymous.smugmug.com and used not my real name.

Andy

So, we're interested in others' opinions on the new page, too.

I have felt for a while that we could lay it out more clearly and cleanly - and this thread prompted me to work with Anne on the new page. But there's always the case that our good intentions have missed the mark.

http://www.smugmug.com/help/private-photo-storage

We try to be extremely transparent and open. If the page needs changing, we'll change it. I'd love to have a good civil discussion about it.

dmc

Andy wrote:

Any name will do. Change it if you like right now.

I just signed up http://anonymous.smugmug.com and used not my real name.

interesting.... ok, I changed my lastname to gooblldeegook (but spelled differently) ... My real lastname is still bringing up my site via search, but I will give it time for the search indexing to update and try again tomorrow.

Andy

dmc wrote:

interesting.... ok, I changed my lastname to gooblldeegook (but spelled differently) ... My real lastname is still bringing up my site via search, but I will give it time for the search indexing to update and try again tomorrow.

Might take longer, too, I really don't know. Don is a SmugSorcerer and some things, well, I just don't know

AnneMcBean

TheDuck wrote:

Is this a joke? Your new "help" page, specifically says that "Perhaps you've recently robbed a bank and have pictures of the loot in your SmugMug site" as the probable reason for not wanting to be on search engines.

Have you ever read of the Lindburgh baby kidnapping (and murder)? Have you seen the houses of wealthy folks from that era? Are you even remotely aware of the concerns that wealthy folks today have of kidnappings and extortion? Do you remember the more recent [SIZE=-1]JonBenét Ramsey child beauty murder?[/SIZE]

Andy - you should be ashamed of yourself for being so flippant about people wanting to share photos with family and friends, but not internet strangers. I am not a pro - I don't want search engines finding photos of my very cute kids, nor my very cute 14yo niece in her swim suit.

Your "help" page update fails to mention that Smugmug purposefully overrides any effort to comply with Google's suggestions to stop search bots - you FORCE the searches to find our sites. You've never yet answered my questions as to WHY you do this.

I'd put my review of Zenfolio on hold, believing that Smugmug was truly listening. Well, listen to this - you have insulted me and you've insulted my family.

Next Wednesday, I am on the agenda to a group of 2,500 families to explain what I've learned about the dangers of internet photo sharing, and what solutions are available. I'll be sure to update my Powerpoint slides to include Smugmug's views of our concerns.

Smug indeed. Perhaps you should rename Smugmug to Snidemug.

Duck out.

Hi Duck,

Obviously I hit a nerve with the help page I wrote and I'm sorry if my words were offensive to you. I hope that I can clear the air concerning my intent in writing that help page. I completely understand your concern regarding privacy for your family and children. I think that SmugMug is a very safe place for photos of children. Simply use a site-wide password (it takes two seconds to create) and no prying eyes can see your photos. Period.

As an aunt of 19 adorable nieces and nephews (with 2 more on the way), I understand the fear of all the terrible things that can and do happen to kids. Even more than that though, I understand the desire to keep your photos away from just plain creeps. I make a habit of password-protecting every gallery of kids at the beach, kids in the tub, even babies in diapers on my SmugMug sites. Simply because, I like to have control over who can see those pictures.

I tried to make the help page distinguish between three general groups of people:

1) A big group that is already "out there" on the internet. They are photographers who would like to get more recognition, people like me who have a public blog with public pictures, and are active on forums. They are families who have pictures that they don't mind being "out there" for anyone to see.

2) A big group that has at least some photos that they don't want public. For this group, gallery privatization and password-protection, or site-wide protection is just the ticket. Or, perhaps, they don't mind their photos being public, but they are careful about how much information about THEM is public. So, they won't want to post their geographic location, email address, age, kids' names, etc.

With a site-wide password, all anyone will know is that someone with your last name has a SmugMug account. And they can't get in. They'll also be able to see your SmugMug nickname, and the password hint you give (if any).

Alternatively, someone can just have all private galleries. Their SmugMug "homepage" would just show people a "this person has no public galleries message", end of story. Again, people would only know that a person by this last name has a SmugMug account and the SmugMug nickname.

3) A very small group of people who do not want anyone to know that anyone by their last name has a SmugMug account at all. For these people, they should take the additional precaution of not using their real last name on the account.

For people in groups 2 and 3, the "hide owner" tip and the "be careful not to post links to your SmugMug site" tip from the new help page may apply.

From my perspective, the people who just don't want strangers to see pictures of their children are completely covered based on the information in the help page in question.

Honestly, it sounds like your concerns would have been addressed by help pages we already had. Namely, on this page: http://smugmug.com/help "How do I hide my photos from random gawkers?" is considered (and rightly so) a hot topic. It leads people to privatization and password protection information. For >99% of our customers, that is all the anonymity they need.

We made this additional help page to outline every precaution we are aware of regarding anonymity, so that very concerned SmugMuggers can know right-off-the-bat how they personally need to approach the set-up of their SmugMug site.

-Anne

p.s. Regarding the bank robber reference, I merely used it as an extreme example of someone who may want to remain anonymous. Obviously, people have their own (usually unnamed) reasons for wanting to remain completely anonymous. I had hoped that it would go without saying that this reference was tongue-in-cheek. SmugMug has never been, and does not intend to be, the harboring ground of convicted felons hoping to cover their crimes (especially ones stupid enough to post pictures of their crimes online).

jfriend

Andy wrote:

Hi John, thanks for posting. Onethumb has technical reasons, that's all I know - wish I had a better answer, I really do. Sorry.

Since this is an important issue to some, it would be much appreciated to understand what technical reasons are preventing this. Without that understanding on our part, it honestly feels more like you all don't understand why people want this and thus aren't prioritizing it. It sure looks to me like it should be fairly straightforward.

Andy

jfriend wrote:

Since this is an important issue to some, it would be much appreciated to understand what technical reasons are preventing this. Without that understanding on our part, it honestly feels more like you all don't understand why people want this and thus aren't prioritizing it. It sure looks to me like it should be fairly straightforward.

I'll see what I can do about finding out John, thanks.

dmc

AnneMcBean wrote:

... Simply use a site-wide password (it takes two seconds to create) and no prying eyes can see your photos. Period.
...

I would be glad to put a password on my site if, once entered, visitors could utilize my keywords, MapThis, and whatever else breaks after the password is added. And if you make your galleries private (unlisted), we throw away all the time spent organizing galleries into Categories and Sub-Categories (since share groups only point to galleries)

We keep going around and around on this. This is why when Smugmug reminds us about the security features, we get cranky cus your implementation of security breaks things that don't have to be broken.

The monolithic indexing (public or nothing) needs to be addressed... not just "gee its complicated, we can't do it..." I've been here a year and a half and I can't think of any security features that have changed in that time.

The new help page is still not clear about these impacts of applying the security features... I also don't agree that "Most people" think it is great that their sites are open to Smugmug's Public search and Browse, MapThis, Popular photos, and Google... by default. I believe the "Most people" have no idea what's happening, and only a few are here bringing it up. (I didn't have a good idea till I became a power user and added statcounter, that's when I saw all the pervs and pukes browsing my site, most of whom came from Smugmug's public search features)

I spent a lot of time adding keywords to 8000 photos, and the keyword searching is probably the most fun Smugmug feature. People always get a kick when I show them how I can pull up all my pictures of my dogs at the beach at sunset... from accross all my galleries!

http://dmcpics.smugmug.com/keyword/dogs-beach-sunset

If a visitor was prompted for my site password after clicking on this link, I think that would be a huge leap forward in improving the security...

otherwise, I'm very happy with Smugmug, it's a beautiful day, and I'm heading out! :ivar

Andy

dmc wrote:

I would be glad to put a password on my site if, once entered, visitors could utilize my keywords, MapThis, and whatever else breaks after the password is added.

Something that was never supposed to work in the first place in this manner can't be called broken. We know you want to be able to do this, but continuing to say that it's "broken" is just wrong, dmc - c'mon play fair.

We keep going around and around on this. This is why when Smugmug reminds us about the security features, we get cranky cus your implementation of security breaks things that don't have to be broken.

Again, not broken, sorry.

The monolithic

?

indexing (public or nothing) needs to be addressed...

OK at this point, let's call it addressed. The present implementation isn't going to change as far as I can tell. I'm sorry I don't have a better answer for you. But, it's the answer we have now.

The new help page is still not clear about these impacts of applying the security features...

GREAT feedback and we'll consider it. We never set a page in stone, and if we can improve on it, we will. Thanks for letting us know.

I also don't agree that "Most people" think it is great that their sites are open to Smugmug's Public search and Browse, MapThis, Popular photos, and Google... by default. I believe the "Most people" have no idea what's happening, and only a few are here bringing it up. (I didn't have a good idea till I became a power user and added statcounter, that's when I saw all the pervs and pukes browsing my site, most of whom came from Smugmug's public search features)

We've had 50,000 emails in the past six months. I'd say we have a pretty good idea about this. Still, we want to be more clear, more precise, and even more open about how things work.

otherwise, I'm very happy with Smugmug, it's a beautiful day, and I'm heading out! :ivar

I wish you good shooting or playing or whatever you do on such a fine day And thanks again for posting, dmc!

Baldy

TheDuck wrote:

Why, Andy, does Smugmug override the HTML code to allow bots to index photos? I understand that pros want exposure...but clearly family accounts do NOT want pervs trolling their cute kids.

Hmmm... That's a very good question I don't know the answer to, but I'll find out tomorrow. I can tell you it isn't to create a larger page index in Google and hence a higher rank. If we weren't willing to sacrifice page rank and stuff like Alexa traffic rankings, we wouldn't allow custom domains.

One issue that's been vexing us for awhile is a patent troll who successfully sued Kodak, Shutterfly, Webshots and EZ Prints, who is after us about US patents 6,321,231 and 6,332,146. The language of the patents is very unclear, but certain claims appear to cover methods of finding private images.

We have yet another call with a law firm this week to try and understand what's covered with respect to private images & finding/searching. I hope it isn't one of these cases where you have to go to trial to understand what the original intent of the patent office was.

It seems so strange that the holders of these patents could be awarded them without creating a photo sharing site and prevent those of us who did start photo sharing sites from implementing features covered by the patents, at least in the U.S.

Rando

TheDuck wrote:

Why, Andy, does Smugmug override the HTML code to allow bots to index photos? I understand that pros want exposure...but clearly family accounts do NOT want pervs trolling their cute kids.

Thanks,
The Duck

You know, this thread "The 2+ Terabyte Question" is what convinced me to sign up for smugmug, http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=24847
The gist of the thread is smugmug installed $45K worth of equipment for ONE POTENTIAL customer who said he wanted to upload 2+ TB of photos and in the end he never did.

But for current customers to have control of a meta tag, a robots.txt file (maybe even a .htaccess file) is a bit of a stretch?