Last week, I held a Mozinar outlining a method to extract SERP vertical -- called Universal Search by Google --- from Google referral strings. Since the Mozinar concluded, the number of people who have reached out with their own theories and ideas has been impressive. I want to post everything that I know here and then leave it up to you folks in the SEOmoz community to start hacking and sharing your insight.
For those of you who did not see the Mozinar, you can access it here (voiceover included). You can also download or view the slides without VO on Slideshare here.
Before getting into the step-by-step process and providing examples of how to use the Google referral string to interpret where in Universal Search your traffic came from, I want to lay out a problem we were having at AudienceWise. In 2011, Matthew Brown and I started an agency to help news publishers with technical SEO and audience development. In our other jobs, specifically Matthew at the New York Times, we struggled with reconciling for the lack of data around Universal Search referrals. As far as our web analytics platforms were concerned, a visit from web search, a News OneBox link, and an image result were all treated exactly the same: as organic search traffic.
Then came Google Secure Search, and referral data got even more opaque. In addition to not knowing which Universal vertical the referral came from, now in about 10% of cases we didn’t even know the keyword that referred the traffic. The question that kept going through our collective ginger minds was: how can we help our clients with content strategy if we know nothing about WHY they are receiving said search traffic? Unfortunately, Secure Search has vastly expanded and now accounts for a large percentage of all Google referral traffic. As way of an example, here is the latest percentage of keyword = (not provided) for SEOmoz:
Matthew and I knew the only way to reclaim *some* of this lost data was to start looking at other sources. Luckily, Matt speaks Spanish (sort of) and came across this blog. The author posited that the 'ved' parameter in the Google referral string held some magic in determining the vertical that result appeared in. After doing some quick searches, and looking at the “href” values for the results, it seemed like he was onto something. We immediately set up Google Analytics profile filters to extract this parameter on a client that receives 300,000 search referrals from Google per day. After a couple of hours, we were loaded with enough data to start confirming some of the authors theories and coming up with a few of our own. I will layout what we found, provide a step-by-step tutorial to setup Google Analytics filters, and provide a few examples of how to use the data.
First, let’s talk about where you can find this parameter.
Simply, the Google referral string is the “href” value assigned to each URL in a set of search results. When a user clicks on the above, she is being redirected through a google URL prior to reaching her final destination; Radiohead.com, in this case. Google most likely does this for internal data aggregation reasons -- we’re not suppose to know where our traffic comes from, but they sure make use of it -- probably for aggregating data around SERPs.
There are two parameters that I will focus on here: ‘cd’ and ‘ved.’ The ‘cd’ parameter has been written about before and tells us the position of the search result in the set. As far as I can tell, the ‘ved’ parameter is divided into three parts and tells us which Universal vertical the result is part of, the position within that vertical (relative position), and the position within the search result (absolute position). I will focus on just the Universal aspect for this post and will follow up with relative vs. absolute position in a follow-up.
Let’s have a look at a few examples.
When QFj is in the ‘ved’ parameter that the result is a standard web search result, such as:
One of the attendees of the Mozinar made this astute observation about a special variation for the web search 'ved':
When QqQIw (that’s a capital “i” not a lowercase “L”) it is a Universal result that resides within the Google News OneBox. When QpwI is present that means the result was the thumbnail image within the News OneBox.
You get the idea. Here are some other values of ‘ved.’ I suspect that there are many more and am curious to see what the community here can find and SHARE here within:
Setting up Google Analytics filters
You should have a good understanding now of potential power of this information. Did I mention that it is still available even if the keyword is “(not provided)”? We could potentially interpret the keyword by comparing ‘ved.’ Anyone up for the challenge? I go through one example below. While ‘ved’ appears to persist through Secure Search only about 50% of the search referrals within GA have this data. If anyone can shine light on this, I’m sure the rest of the community would shower you with thumbs ups!
Step 1: Set up a Google Analytics Profile filter
Go to the account’s administrative dashboard and select “New Profile.” I would recommend against setting this filter up on an existing profile as that it will overwrite some data that you otherwise want. I called mine ‘Universal Search.’
Next, you will need to set up two advanced filters; one to extract ‘ved’ and ‘cd’ from the Google referral string, and the other to display the data within Google Analytics.
Universal Extract
Here’s the text of the regex that I used
Field A (\?|&)(ved)=([^&]*)
Field B (\?|&)(cd)=([^&]*)
Universal Display
There’s many different ways to do this. I’ve decided to overwrite the campaign dimension of source since that’s where I am checking my organic search referrals.
Filters work while the data is streaming in and will not be reflected retroactively. That’s fine; you just have to wait for a day or so (or an hour or so for bigger sites) to start digging in. Here’s what it should look like:
Step 2: Set up Advanced Segments
I prefer to do this level of analysis in Excel, but Advanced Segments can be created to make it all look pretty in GA. I will walk you through the setup of one, which will inform you how to do the rest.
You will want to name your Advanced Segment something that will clue you in to which vertical you are analyzing. In this case, I have called out that it is a standard ‘blue link’ result from a News OneBox. From there, all you need to do is search on ‘Source’ for anything containing the ‘ved’ you are trying to isolate. In this case, we are looking for ‘QqQIw.’
Here’s an example of what you will see:
Wow! There is an actionable result right in front of me. It’s probably time to do some image optimization. Google apparently respects the site as a news authority, but not one that creates good images.
Another useful ‘ved’ to investigate is Sitelinks. Sitelinks are a subset of results triggered by a branded search. Google algorithmically determines which links to include, but webmasters have the ability to demote links in Webmaster Tools. The 'ved’ parameter can come in handy to measure performance of Sitelink pages and action can be taken. In order to figure out the Sitelink that sent the search referral, look at the ‘cd’ value that was passed with the referral string. We accounted for this in the filters and it is in your data here:
Here’s what the ‘cd’ values mean in relation to Sitelink results:
There are myriad of use cases for bubbling up SEO action items. Here are a few, and please add more in the comments:
- Calculating ROI and resource allocation for different SEO efforts: News, image, branded, and semantic markup. As marketers, we are only as valuable as what we can quantify. A challenge with SEO is demonstrating value. This does not solve the problem, but exposes a few more variables to work with.
- Optimizing branded search Sitelinks: As I outlined above, there is value in knowing which branded links send you traffic. This is also one area where you can mitigate the loss of keyword data due to Secure Search. When you see that a keyword is (not provided) AND ved = xxxxQjB, you can interpolate that keyword = YOUR BRAND.
- Image optimization for Google News: The top link in the Google News OneBox is most often a different source than the image thumbnail. If ved = xxxxQqQIw ÷ ved = xxxxQpwI, or the ratio of links to images, is way off-kilter it suggests there is an image optimization issue. Publishers can then use this data to measure optimization efforts against a pre-established baseline.
- Optimizing video thumbnails: Images of video that are alongside a link are always from the same source as the link. Marketers can use a similar ratio as above to analyze click-through rates and on-page analysis when ved = xxxxQuAIw.
- Analyzing efficacy of semantic markup: As the occurrences of SERPS that include clickable rich-snippets and knowledge graph elements increase, being able to parse and understand the referrals using ‘ved’ is clear. I have only started looking at results that have rich-snippets, but the initial data suggests that ‘ved’ may even indicate what type event, of rich snippet was clicked. Here are a few examples: (This is one area that could use a lot more research from the community!)
Events Markup: ved = xxxBE0MGM
Music Markup: ved = xxxQ6hEw
- SERP landscape analysis: If you can scrape a Google SERP, you can tell which ‘ved’ elements are on the page and know which verticals are in each. The ‘href’ lives within Java Script so the simplest way to retrieve it is by using a headless browser such PhantomJS.
That about wraps it up for my first -- of hopefully many -- posts on ‘ved.’ In the months to come, Moz will be collecting Google referral string data on a great number of SERPs for various keywords. We plan to unleash our data hound to sniff out the most useful elements. In the meantime, I would like to use this post as a place for the hacking to begin and the sharing of your thoughts in the comments.
Dig in!
Thx Tim!
Also breadcrumbs in SERP have their parameters
SERP title URL has parameter: ved=0CHMQFjAL
example.com > breadcr1 > breadcr2 > breadcr3
Leads to:
example.com > ved=0CHUQ6QUoADAL > ved=0CHYQ6QUoATAL > ved=0CHcQ6QUoAjAL
Another one with main serp URL: ved=0CHcQFjAG
Breadcrumbs have:
example.com > ved=0CHkQ6QUoADAG > ved=0CHoQ6QUoATAG > ved=0CHsQ6QUoAjAG
So conclusion, I would say:
Clicked Organic Search breadcrumb is:
AD = first breadcrumb
AT = second breadcrumb
Aj = third breadcrumb
Stellar. Nice find.
I imagine that we are going to find a bunch of valuable VEDs related to rich snippets.
Amazeball!
(and very glad a study done by a Spanish friend of mine got to be valued outside of the Spanish SEO universe and led to this study).
Hey Tim - we've been generating internal reports based on a similar query string parsing for a little over a year now. As to your question "While ‘ved’ appears to persist through Secure Search only about 50% of the search referrals within GA have this data." - the answers a fairly easy one. It's device related. From all the strings we look at about 97% of mobile queries don't contain paramater values (like "cd="). We've also seen a small % of PC strings that don't have it - but we're talking like 5%. The assumption is that google passes/captures less of the referrer data to make it lighter on theses devices.
As a side note, If you haven't seen this post from last year you may want to check it out: https://www.t75.org/2012/06/deconstructing-googles-url-search-parameters/. I think the guy gets credit for starting the conversation publicly (although privately it's been going on since 2009 when Google first introduced these parameter changes). I don't know the blog owner, so no self-promotion here.
Oh yeah, and as acronymseo says above, if Google changes their encryption and all my reports stop working I'm coming to find you :). Just kidding - good info that I think is very useful to get a better understanding of SEO traffic.
Nice insights to share based on such a decent time frame testing these types of filters. My question was going to be can you link the issue of mobile devices that don't contain the parameters values but if you say it's 97% that sounds like it is not just an OS, Device or Javascript issue but the % of PC strings that don't have it are they mostly Safari browsers?
Right - agreed. don't think it has anything to do with OS. I think it is Google mobile itself trying to be faster by not generating the param values.
As far as where the PC loss is, where just not sure, and because it's so small we haven't really been concerned enough to investigate any further. If i see anything in the next day or two that might suggest where the PC loss I'll update here.
Hey roseberry - thanks for the insight on the referral string being stripped based on device. Perhaps they are trying to 'compress' the packet to optimize for wireless networks and such.
I have checked out Tim Minor's blog in the past and found his breakdown of some of the other params very helpful, particularly the one related to "user search behavior", "sa". That is an area in itself that deserves research and hacking.
It looks to me that on the ved parameter, Tim gives credit to SEO ma non troppo (https://www.seomanontroppo.com/analitica-en-google-news-otras-zarandajas/), just as I did above, for clarifying what that parameter actually denotes. This was the post that pointed Matthew Brown and I in the right direction to start building use cases and process around ved for some of our news publisher clients.
I hope the guys from Google don't make changes to the referral string.
Great! i´m studying the ved parameter, and i can see that not always you have this parameters. For example, the organic parameter not always is "QFj", you have the parameter "BEBY" for organic too for example.
BEBY= Organic with places results on SERP with map (right)
Good observation. Super valuable to know that you have an organic ranking where a local pack appears to a) better understand the lanscape of your SERP and b) to consider tactics to moving from an organic result into the pack result (assuming it's relevant for your site).
Thanks, its very relevant for me business track it
I´m thinking we have a lot of work about referrer decoding.
Great find. It would be useful if you could create a GIST on Github the parameters so that we can track them over time and see the revisions that occur. Google Filters can be extremely dangerous and I would only look to track these on a separate profile just in case Google decides to change the meaning of each parameter combination. It's quite reliant on them not changing anything which isn't a great plan.
Really good idea in regards to Github.
+1 that this should be tracked in a separate profile.
"SEO, ma non troppo" author of the original post, translated it to English:
https://www.seomanontroppo.com/google-news-analytics-stuff/
This article is good study. But there are downsides:1. It 'completely' dependent on Google - They can change anytime.2. For different search types/verticals its complete different, so generalizations cannot be made
I suggest to do deep dive further into following:1. Analyse the 'landing page' traffic, position of keyword and how users interact after landing on the page .
Log files used in combination with Google Analytic's and Google Webmaster tools should usually provide meaningful data.
Hi Haseeb, thanks for the comments. There are downsides to relying on this data. Remember it is more-or-less a hack and further research needs to be done. With Google continuing to limit certain types of data we need to try to find various means of understanding our traffic and not rely on Google to provide us what we need to see.
This is why I enjoy being a part of this community! Fantastic insight, good attention to detail, and this is only part one. Maybe, just maybe, we can get some more clarity on the (not provided)!
Great information Tim.
I will definitely take a deeper dive into this and do some more analysis. I also agree with those above that we should move this up to Github and track this together. I feel all of us are trying to figure out the best way to analyze and report with this huge (not provided) keyword dilemma. I actually had to build my own little tool so I could properly (more of an estimate) report on Organic Non-Brand Keywords. https://www.wheelhousesearch.com/seo-tools/non-brand-traffic-estimator/
This is fantastic. Thanks for sharing :)
Thanks Tim for this awesome post. I tried this yesterday and here is my analytics screenshot https://i.imgur.com/C4XkxGP.png . Why I'm getting that 'google' as source, did I done something wrong?
Hi Irlyas, thanks for sharing. No, you are not doing anything wrong. It looks to be set up right. The reason you are just seeing "Google" and not a referral string is because a decent percentage of Google referrals do not include it. As mentioned by roseberry above it is likely being stripped out from searches done by certain types of devices.
I am seeing a very high volume of "google/organic" traffic yet in my filtered profile, and it does not correlate with mobile usage. Could some of it be direct traffic? From what I understand, only the source is contained within the utmz cookie; the utmr variable (which contains the referral string) looks blank when I click on a link to a site from SERPS, close my browser tab and then go back to the site directly.
[Note: Edited "does correlate with mobile usage" to read "does not correlate ..."]
Great investigation, As Google is hiding more data we became more curios to get some back. This awesome post should be added in my curated list with other credible posts.
@ timresnik please provide author bio so I can add it to my list https://www.seoorb.com/list-of-11-actionable-posts-on-how-to-get-not-provided-keyword-data/
Hey Asif, you can find more about me on my Mozzer profile here.
Hey Tim,
thanks for the great Post!
It all worked fine, but I experience a variety of different referral strings. Does somebody know by chance how to interpret them?
Especially: "QqQIo" (also, but on much smaller scale:"Q-Aso")
Ideas anyone?
And also I get about 25% of the traffic without an addition to the source (just stating "google" as source). How can I interpret this data?
Thanks
Matthias
Is this some kind of April Fools' Day ? ;-) Very interesting work, thanks a lot for sharing!
Totally brilliantly collected data.
I've seen your slideshare presentation some days ago about this - great one. I am still digesting the info ... the post is a very good and needed follow up !
Cheers.
Extremely
useful. We've had this setup on our profile for about a month now, and just recently I've noticed the following string types showing up in our sources:
1t:3588,r:68,s:100,i:208
1t:3588,r:8,s:0,i:102
1t:429,r:0,s:0,i:83
etc. Anyone have any insight?
Its continually good to learn tips like you share just for blog submitting
Its continually good to learn tips like you share just for blog submitting
Fantastic post Tim. Very well articulated and well explained. I will work to implement this and follow back with our findings. On of the interesting points to monitor and where we can all expound on is how they apply the parameters to different industries. Music, baseball, etc. As we gather more data on this, I think a great post would be for someone to make a master list of all of the industry parameters discovered so far. Thanks.
I was looking for a really long time for an effective way to monitor Google News.
That's really a great post for the advanced SEO - thumbs up!
How cool @Tim!!! Great post
Great article. The list of verticals is really useful. Do you know if anyone has published a more comprehensive list of VED parameters though? I'm finding a lot of different ones. I'm sure I'll eventually find them on the page, but it would be useful to know if anyone has mapped it out.
Thanks!
@timresnik: Read the post as soon as it was published but didn't put it into application then. It was only Today when I wanted to write a post on combining 2 ideas that I put this into application. Tim, I see various combination of Ved parameters and it has confused me a bit. For example - ved=0CIoBEKgpMAw , ved=0CEYQqCkwAw, ved=0CNsCEKgpMC and all these point to author image pulled from simple search.
Has anyone come across such thing?
Timresnik@
I am in shock that why i never noticed all these things.. this post is not less than a discovery. I have no word to say, simply its one of the best posts which i read on moz...
Oh my god, imagine if you code decode if the listing has Authorship enhancement or not.. I've tried it, but no luck so far. I don't think the ved= paramater contains it, unless it's in the first 4 characters. Anyone have any idea on this?
One thing I found is that logged-in searches (desktop at least) will pass a "sig2=" paramater, e.g., sig2=wXQo780fl0SZOlu-MAv-4g&bvm. I only see this when signed in.
The only other unknown is the "usg=" paramater. E.g., usg=AFQjCNF46rjPDgbLrq8FgO5wZpMlDucW6Q. The first part is the same on all searches I've found so far: usg=AFQ jCN
Wrong! I have searched today with cache cookie cleared unsigned browser (maxthon) it gives me
ei=_djXU5yFNYq7uATtiYC4CQ&usg=AFQjCNGBNk6IwKQ6FNT0-3RXETyTADVQMQ&bvm=bv.71954034,d.c2E
USG may be user google , but what the bvm stands for, it is number, may be location tracker type?
This is one of the most useful posts! I've been looking for precisely this information all of my life! Thanks, Tim!
Thanks for the kind words :)
One more to add, for In-Depth articles, I'm seeing the vertical code as Q1Sc for the link and Q1ic for the image link.
Anyone seeing the string for Answer Box results? I'm seeing it show up as organic, QFjA, right now.
Recently implemented this into my analytics and it has given so much depth to my reporting. Would highly recommend that people give this a try.
Well, I'm pretty annoyed at this too, nothing to do about it. We wouldn't neeed SSL google if the NSA and EU wasn't watching our every move online. EU anti terror logging, NSA, PRISM etc.
SSL is slower to search, more cpu usage etc.
And no referals :-( - biggest downside, just an encrypted url with no keywords in. Sucks.
Great discussion here. Has this been updated for Universal Analytics?
Hi,
I followed all your steps, but on "Step 1: Set up a Google Analytics Profile filter", I created new account instead (because I don't see profile in admin, not sure if account is the same with profile). Now I have a new GA tracking code. How do I add the new GA tracking code if I have existing GA tracking code? Should I just paste it below the existing one? Are there any drawbacks with having 2 different GA tracking codes inside one site?
Hi, I implemented this for the USG= parameter being sent in all HTTPS queries (and sometimes in HTTP queries). This 'usg' parameter seems to correspond to the encrypted search string (i.e. the 'q' parameter in HTTP queries). This encrypted search string seems to be always encrypted the same way. So the same search string will always give the same encrypted usg value (=> no salt, no timestamping, ...).
Can anyone help me? Is there any way to do this without the ved= parameter? google gives this search query to my company's page https://www.google.ru/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#newwindow=1&q=awara%20group . As you can see cleary, there is no ved= parameter, so should I just forget about this or is there a way to circumvent it?
Hi Tim and thanx for this great article.
i was thinking to write some shell code to capture google strings and convert in human readable text along time ago..
This article helping to bypass a lot of annoying stuff.
hope to write a script and share it.
In your studies, did you notice any unique VED strings for blended pack results you can share?
So I'm thinking about starting a Google Doc on this one and mining everything I can. Admittedly, it's not a smart long-term SEO strategy per se, but could be a pleasant distraction in the meantime.
For SEO's, I feel like it would be a smart step to outline your keyword space, then move to competitors, indirect competition, etc.
Edit: I just checked a URL in Chrome, and there was no ved parameter to be found. Any feedback?
Benjamin Schulz has now decoded the ved parameter. The ved parameter is normally encoded using protobuf (although sometimes it is not encoded—i.e. it's just left as plain text).
This means that, although people have spotted patterns in ved values, you can't actually rely on regex matching. The ved value is a variable-length message containing key-value pairs. If Google change the order of the key-value pairs, then the regex patterns required to match it would have to be updated.
Schulz has found that the ved value normally contains the page number and position of the search result clicked on, and the "sub-position" of the link clicked on (if it was a related link).
It also contains some sort of "type" parameter. Schulz writes: "On normal web searches this parameter is always 22, on image searches it is 429."
Finally, it also contains another parameter which seems to be tied in to how much the result is relevant to the user. In the non-encoded (plain-text) version of the ved value, this last parameter is labelled by Google as "i". Schulz conjectures that it stands for "index_boost", and writes:
"It increases incrementally on each page of search results. And it changes whether you're logged in or not. When searching for "grumpy cats" and logged into a google account, i was 42 for the first result. When not logged in, it was 57. (at least in my test case)
"Sure enough, the results are ordered differently when logged in or not. So maybe the i parameter is somehow related to individualised search? Lets say,i is a value, that denotes the relevance of the search result to the user. I'll call it index_boost. Here more research is still needed, please comment if you find out more."
Truly amazing stuff. Wow. Google wouldn't intentionally change this would they? We don't have to worry about this being caught and fixed do we?
Wow, interesting. Very complex and advanced GA setup, but sounds like a great way to get some more search data. Especially after 100% of Google is secure search now, and all we see is "not provided"
Hello everyone.
I've managed to completely decode the ved parameter. If you're interested, you can read the full Article. There's also an online demonstration and a GitHub repository with the source code for the decoder.
Thanks for sparking my interest in the topic and keep up the good work!
-- Benjamin
OMG! This is insanely awesome info! Seems like another sleepless night for me today...
This is great, thanks Tim. I'd missed the webinar, looking forward to giving this a go. Worried that Google might just shake it all up at some point though? But I guess the benefit is here while it is coded this way :)
Really love this, just added it to my first account! Thank you Tim!
Wow this is some awesome information, thanks for sharing!
Increible! Valiosa info!
Watched the mozinar video, lasted quite a bit longer than i thought! Very informative and well explained though.
Being new to the industry, it's nice to see what all the 'top guys' are getting up to - making my learning experience a lot easier.
Hello Tim!
Thank you so much for sharing this important concept and explaining it in brief! :)
Finally! Thanks for cracking the code :)
Awesome post! Tim, thanks for your analysis and tips about this issue. It helped me a lot. +1
Very nice post, I liked the slide share version of this post you put together as well.
Awesome Post Tim,
Thanks for Sharing tips for not provided data
i am also searching for not Set data can you help me?
Awesome Post!
Fantastic post! I'll certainly be implementing these and would love to read more.
Now I also really want to brush off my Spanish from college and try to read some Spanish blogs. :-)
This is the beginning of the end for the "not provided" ? A BIG THANKS to crack the code !!!!
Bernard sur ndx.fr
take some used to getting the letters down, but fantastic drilldown here!
Amazing SEO data about Google's referral string. Thanks for sharing!
what's another way to setup the second filter (display) so I don't overwrite my dimensions?
Amazing article, thanks!
I'd be using this hack for paid search... to tell if something is organic or paid
BUT
I see QFJ showing up in my refferral URL for a lead I know is paid PPC because of the tagging from the ad included.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=www.mywebsitehere.com+keywords&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CFwQFjAB&url=https://mywebsite.com/g/keywords?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=+keyword&utm_campaign=Campaignname&utm_adgroup=adgroupname&qs=+keyword&query={QueryString}&adid=14869711949%20&device=computer&network=&adtype=text&adpos=none&placement=&sitelink={&ei=pMNYUaiyHbC4YqEg&usg=AFQjCNEGnf68ea7w56ks1xtY7l6wT4o7ig
Recently KissMetrics posted some other tips regarding this issue: https://blog.kissmetrics.com/unlock-keyword-not-provided/
Thanks to provide information about decoding Google's referral string.
Thanks for sharing Tim, this is like learning technical SEO
Thanks Ones again..
Awesome post Tim.
Thanks for sharing such a helpful information. Cheers..
You say you use Excel instead of Advance Segments. How do you set up filters in Excel?
Hi John, what I meant to communicate is that you can do the analysis in Excel rather than Advanced Segments. i.e. normalizing the data by extracting the key portion of ved and then running pivot table, etc.
I can't get over how awesome this post is and how helpful it will be for tracking efforts. Been coming back all day!
Wow this is good stuff but it's heavy! I will bookmark for a future day when my head is a little less foggy. Thanks for sharing with the community.
I hope someone comes up with a new google alternative soon, I don't really trust them, they put pacman on my homepage, they link my accounts without my knowledge - youtube,google,google+,... - and they share my searches and videos on my google+ without I'm even being aware I have one, then my facebook friends can see what I search for. Privacy is dead if you got a google acccount. Luckily I don't
I am impressed by your post @timresnik.. Well, this post is totally based on technical side. If you are familiar with technical (coding) then you can easily implement this strategy in your SEO projects..