SSL Certificate valid for SEO https
-
Hi everybody!
I have talked with my hosting provider and he offers me two kind of SSL. I've read that the best option for SEO is to convert the hole site to https response (not only the payment pages), but my developer team is telling me that this kind of security to the whole site will be negative for all the websites contained under this IP ¡!
So I wonder if somebody who has the https implemented correctly and working properly for SEO could recommend me:
-
which kind of certificate is the correct one and what specific things sould I consider with my hosting provider
-
if it's true that could be a disaster if I implement the https to the whole website beacause I'm blocking the robots and it's dangerous for my domains in this server
Please, any help would be really appreciated. Thanks in advance!
-
-
As long as you properly redirect all pages to the https version, you should be fine. Google released an update a while back stating that secure sites could perform better in search results as it offered users additional security and trust. If you are going through the trouble of updating your site to an SSL, I would set the entire site to fall under the https, not just the payment pages. Google will like it, users will like it. The only drawback I can see is if your account is set up to use shared IP's, in which case you may have to make some modifications if required by your development team.
Here is the quote from Google on this subject:
"Security is a top priority for Google. We invest a lot in making sure that our services use industry-leading security, like strong HTTPS encryption by default. That means that people using Search, Gmail and Google Drive, for example, automatically have a secure connection to Google.
Beyond our own stuff, we’re also working to make the Internet safer more broadly. A big part of that is making sure that websites people access from Google are secure. For instance, we have created resources to help webmasters prevent and fix security breaches on their sites.
We want to go even further. At Google I/O a few months ago, we called for “HTTPS everywhere” on the web.
We’ve also seen more and more webmasters adopting HTTPS (also known as HTTP over TLS, or Transport Layer Security), on their website, which is encouraging.
For these reasons, over the past few months we’ve been running tests taking into account whether sites use secure, encrypted connections as a signal in our search ranking algorithms. We've seen positive results, so we're starting to use HTTPS as a ranking signal. For now it's only a very lightweight signal — affecting fewer than 1% of global queries, and carrying less weight than other signals such as high-quality content — while we give webmasters time to switch to HTTPS. But over time, we may decide to strengthen it, because we’d like to encourage all website owners to switch from HTTP to HTTPS to keep everyone safe on the web."
It's worth mentioning that if the SEO on the site stinks, an SSL will not rescue it from the bowels of page 10 ranking status.
Hope this helps!
-
Hello Esther,
Before going ahead with a move to HTTPS for what could be little gain, have you thought if there are other things that could be done first that will benefit you more e.g responsive UX etc.
A move to HTTPS can be a big job and needs to undertaken very carefully to minimise problems, check, check and check again all redirects, canonical links, external, internal links etc to ensure that you give yourself the best chance to succeed in a move.
For more on moving to HTTPS take a look at a good article from Branded3 about some of the additional pros and cons.
-
-
There is no such thing as an SEO SSL certificate. You just need one that is 2048 bit encryption ideally
-
Having an entire site as https is not a bad thing... in fact it's recommended by Google.
-
Its up to you to implement it sitewide or only on pages with secure information being exchanged (checkout, login)
There is a small boost to SEO from https urls but there also might be a small dip in rankings from switching over (and using 301 redirects). In addition, if you mess up the URL transfer, you could hurt yourself so be sure to do a proper site move.
-
-
It used to be true that you had to have one IP per SSL certificate, but if you have a modern web server you can use something called Server Name Indication instead.
I'm not sure what you mean by "offered 2 types of certificate". There's a couple of ways to take that.
- Your provider is offering you a SHA1 or a SHA2 (SHA256) certificate. If you get this option select SHA2, as SHA1 is now deprecated due to security issues and will be unsupported in modern browsing soon.
- Your provider offered you domain validation vs extended validation. The latter is only for registered corporations and gives you the "green bar". It does not afford you any more security from an encryption standpoint (both use the same underlying systems), it just looks better in the browser.
Putting your whole site under SSL is not a bad move from an SEO standpoint. Google publicly said that SSL is a ranking factor (nobody knows how much of one it is, but the boost is minor if there is one) and robots have supported SSL for many years. What I would do, if I were you, is make sure you have a proper redirect to force users into SSL. Don't run a mixed encrypted/unencrypted site if possible.
Last but certainly not least, after you get your SSL set up you need to audit your SSL. This is a critical step many website owners miss. Just this weekend I found a site with incredibly outdated software and, as such, it supported every SSL flaw in the book. A site with SSL exploits still enabled might as well not run any SSL at all.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Javascript and SEO
I've done a bit of reading and I'm having difficulty grasping it. Can someone explain it to me in simple language? What I've gotten so far: Javascript can block search engine bots from fully rendering your website. If bots are unable to render your website, it may not be able to see important content and discount these content from their index. To know if bots could render your site, check the following: Google Search Console Fetch and Render Turn off Javascript on your browser and see if there are any site elements shown or did some disappear Use an online tool Technical SEO Fetch and Render Screaming Frog's Rendered Page GTMetrix results: if it has a Defer parsing of Javascript as a recommendation, that means there are elements being blocked from rendering (???) Using our own site as an example, I ran our site through all the tests listed above. Results: Google Search Console: Rendered only the header image and text. Anything below wasn't rendered. The resources googlebot couldn't reach include Google Ad Services, Facebook, Twitter, Our Call Tracker and Sumo. All "Low" or blank severity. Turn off Javascript: Shows only the logo and navigation menu. Anything below didn't render/appear. Technical SEO Fetch and Render: Our page rendered fully on Googlebot and Googlebot Mobile. Screaming Frog: The Rendered Page tab is blank. It says 'No Data'. GTMetrix Results: Defer parsing of JavaScript was recommended. From all these results and across all the tools I used, how do I know what needs fixing? Some tests didn't render our site fully while some did. With varying results, I'm not sure where to from here.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nhhernandez1 -
Faceted Navigation & SEO
Hi Is my faceted navigation bad for SEO?! example: http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/metal-cabinets-cupboards Thanks 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
A few important mobile SEO questions
I have a few basic questions about mobile SEO. I'd appreciate if any of you fabulous Mozzers can enlighten me. Our site has a parallel mobile site with the same urls, using an m. domain for mobile and www. for desktop. On mobile pages, we have a rel="canonical" tag pointing to the matching desktop URL and on desktop pages we have a rel="alternate" tag pointing to the matching mobile URL. When someone visits a www. page using a mobile device, we 301 them to the mobile version. Questions: 1. Do I want my mobile pages to be indexed by Google? From Tom's (very helpful) answers here, it seems that I only want Google indexing the full site pages and if the mobile pages are indexed it's actually a duplicate content issue. This is really confusing to me since Google knows that it's not duplicate content based on the canonical tag. But - he makes a good point - what is the value of having the mobile page indexed if the same page on desktop is indexed (I know that Google is indexing both because I see them in search results. When I search on mobile Google serves the mobile page and when I search on desktop Google serves me the desktop page.)? Are these pages competing with each other? Currently, we are doing everything we can do ensure that our mobile pages are crawled (deeply) and indexed, but now I'm not sure what the value of this is? Please share your knowledge. 2. Is a mobile page's ranking affected by social shares of the desktop version of the same page? Currently, when someone uses the share buttons on our mobile site, we share the desktop url (www. - not m.). The reason we do this is that we are afraid that if people are sharing our content with 2 different url's (m.mysite.com/some_post and www.mysite.com/some_post) the share count will not be aggregated for both url's. What I'm wondering is: will this have a negative effect on mobile SEO, since it will seem to Google that our mobile pages have no shares, or is this not a problem, since the desktop pages have a rel="alternate" tag pointing to mobile pages, so Google gives the same ranking to the mobile page as the desktop page (which IS being shared)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | YairSpolter0 -
Is .ME domain is effective in SEO ?
I am always listening about TLD. com. org .net but what about the .me domain. Can this will be effective in SEO. Can i able to beat down my competitors, if i choose .me . I also have a .com or other TLD option but if i am making my name than .me is for me but i need your suggestion for the seo purpose. Is there really domain affective in term of SEO.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pnb5670 -
SEO implications of serving a different site on HTTPS vs. HTTP
I have two sites: Site A, and Site B. Both sites are hosted on the same IP address, and server using IIS 7.5. Site B has an SSL cert, and Site A does not. It has recently been brought to my attention that when requesting the HTTPS version of Site A (the site w/o an SSL cert), IIS will serve Site B... Our server has been configured this way for roughly a year. We don't do any promotion of Site A using HTTPS URLs, though I suppose somebody could accidentally link to or type in HTTPS and get the wrong website. Until we can upgrade to IIS8 / Windows Server 2012 to support SNI, it seems I have two reasonable options: Move Site B over to its own dedicated IP, and let HTTPS requests for Site A 404. Get another certificate for Site A, and have it's HTTPS version 301 redirect to HTTP/non-ssl. #1 seems preferable, as we don't really need an SSL cert for Site A, and HTTPS doesn't really have any SEO benefits over HTTP/non-ssl. However, I'm concerned if we've done any SEO damage to Site A by letting our configuration sit this way for so long. I could see Googlebot trying https versions of websites to test if they exist, even if there aren't any ssl/https links for the given domain in the wild... In which case, option #2 would seem to mostly reverse any damage done (if any). Though Site A seems to be indexed fine. No concerns other than my gut. Does anybody have any recommendations? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dsbud0 -
SEO friendly blog.
i've read somewhere that if you list too many links/articles on one page, google doesn't crawl all of them. In fact, Google will only crawl up to 100 links/articles or so. Is that true? If so, how do I go about creating a page or blog that will be SEO friendly and capable of being completely crawled by google?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | greenfoxone0 -
Site structure from an SEO standpoint
I am fortunate enough to be working with a client who is still building their website. From a site structure standpoint, what can I look for with my SEO hat as they build their wire frames and storyboard their site? I want to make sure I don't miss any components that might be helpful short and long term
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | StreetwiseReports0 -
SEO for a plumber?
Hello, How does a small, local business win at SEO (without abusing directories, articles, and paid links)? It seems that everyone is saying "create unique content", but that just doesn't seem realistic for a small plumber in a big metro area. One might suggest coming up with helpful articles about plumbing tips, etc., but there are thousands of spun articles on article directories already. On page optimization is in place, we are listed in the main directories, we've asked the people we know to link to us, and we are engaged in social media. What would you recommend next? Thanks, Will
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | WillWatrous0