This is General Manager from co.cc. I tried to contact to General Manager of Google but I haven’t got any reply from him. Therefore, I post my message in here to ask you forward this to him.
I know the reason that Google deindex to co.cc because it has high ration of malicious sites and low quality sites. However, I don’t think it is right decision that Google just block the whole domain which has 10 millions co.cc sites and 200millions webpages without any notice to us.
Within total co.cc sites, the fraction of malicious sites is not over 0.01%. We have block malicious domains that we got this information from many major vaccine companies including Trend Micro and Symantect since 2010. And also, according to Spamhaus advices, if there is any new domain set, we are checking whether the server IP is not list to Spamhaus Block List. In addition, once we get malicious domains information from major vaccine companies every day, we are promptly doing Shinkhole. With these kinds of serious monitoring and taking prompt actions, the ratio of operating malicious domains have been not over 0.01%.
We have no right to force internet users making high quality web pages. It is obviously to overstep our authority. Each internet user has their own right to make their website and it is their ability to do so.
As you know, xxx.blogspot.com and facebook.com/xxx have about 70%~80% that have been just setting there without any caring. On the other words, those are actually low-quality sites. I have a question to you. “Can you deindex those *.blogspot.com and facebook.com/* sites? Your Google-robot is already smart enough, so those low-quality sites are rarely exposure due to falling into behind of dominant searches. If necessary, you might need to make more smart Google robot.
In addition, there isn't any notice that “if goole Apps and blogger.com Users set cutomdomain to use co.cc, they will get any disadvantages.” You should know that there are thousands users for the apps, blogger and google-sites are using co.cc domain as their custom domains.
Moreover, you have never noticed to those users that they will get any disadvantages if they use .co.cc(SLD). Nevertheless, it is no right thing to deindex all those sites.
We always supply our all domains information and zone files to vaccine company if request. Whenever they request to us, we are always to prepare for it. We will accept any difficult request from you and we even take serious positive consideration if we need to sell co.cc.
If we take much longer time, thousands users will have more loss from it. We and you all know that someone should take responsibility for their losses which cannot take it back.
We are looking forward to hearing your reply soon.
Hi James, notwithstanding all the low quality spam sites that you have on your domain, I will highlight the phishing activities on it and will refer to this report from ICANN's Anti-Phishing Working Group;
• If we counted these unique subdomains as “regular” domain names, they would represent 22% of all domains used for phishing.
By removing just one 2L domain, Google have removed a quarter of all those phishing sites ! Thats a significant figure and Google should be applauded for doing so ;)
As Luzie explained, your apparent business model is based on deceit to legitimate customers who are nieve enough to pay for such a service. Hopefully your company will apologise and compensate them for any consequential losses that they may incur.
I will go further and question whether .co.cc is actually in cahoots with the Avalanche group ?
> Within total co.cc sites, the fraction of malicious sites is not over 0.01%
You pulled that value out of your butt. 95% of the crap spam for porn, illegal downloads, online pharmacy crap and malicious content is stupid spam links to a co.cc domain. I now block all email addresses to that domain to lower my spam count, so I don't have child porn sites posted on my forum.
Do you have any proof data for your claims? I think if you are a professional, you shouldn’t claim without any proof data.
As we offer our all domain lists and zone files to Trend Micro and Symantec, if you are a internet security company same as Trend Micro and Symantec, we can also offer all domain lists and zone files to you.
And then, you will see you were wrong but I was right.
If you're a true professional, you wouldn't say things like "I think if you are a professional, you shouldn’t claim without any proof data." or "And then, you will see you were wrong but I was right."
James, from Google's point of view, you are just another subdomain, responsible for content on your subdomains too. If you want to be included in Google index, follow webmaster guidelines , remove duplicate content, avoid linking to bad websites (is this your case?), send request for reconsideration and ...... wait a few weeks/months (as we did too http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=74f841aa26aaa590&hl=en). If you allow your users to create websites under your domain, you are still responsible for their content. I personally do not know your project, but I think that co.cc is not the TLD domain, so you are at the same level as others.
Since the regulations for Porn contents in Korea are much restrict than US, we block those Porn contents more seriously than Google in U.S.
Moreover, Google is officially accepting those Prono contents. http://www.blogger.com/content.g
To block out child prono distribute, we also have cooperated with FBI. And also, we refer to Spamhaus Block List to Shinkhole for online pharmacy sites and illegal downloads servers. In addition, we get whole general information from not only malware site but also porn, illegal downloads, online pharmacy sites by Trend micro.
>gbint: If a user in Google webmaster tool verifies ownership, the user can get approval for sub-domain as a separate domain from root-domain. And also, same as Google apps or Blogger, if a user verifies ownership, the user can use sub-domain as custom-domain. Therefore, Hundreds of thousands users have registered in webmaster tool, Google apps and others.
The most important thing is there is no any notice from Google that there are some disadvantages if the user use sub-domain. Even though a normal site was complying with webmaster-guidelines, the site was also deindex.
>ZeroCool2u: what to do for internet? Do you think it is right to deindex for 10 millions sites and 200 millions websites without any explanation of reasons and notifications? Is it right way to do for internet making suffer to hundreds of thousands users?
>gbint: We would like to get answers from Google. Since co.cc is free domain, we often get misunderstood that malicious sites ratio might be high. However, few thousands of 10 millions sites and few ten thousand of 200 millions websites have absolute not much fraction. On the other hand, there are 99.9% for legitimate website.
I think an important clue here is that your 10 Million sites vanished and no one cared. There was no outrage on Twitter or Facebook or in fact, an outpouring of sympathy anywhere on the net.
Not trying to be mean or disrespectful here, but EVERYONE I have read or talked to about this (100%) are Happy and Delighted about this ban -- and they are praying that Google never reverses it's decision**.
**the sole exception being yourself and people with sub-sites on your domain, of course.
As you are not a TLD, but a SLD, it is your responsibility to inform your customers that they are all considered under the domain co.cc, should something happen to this domain, they will all lose their sites. This is the case with any SLD, and not Google nor any other service on the internet are obligated to inform YOUR customers of anything at all, as you should be informing them of this upon their registration.
Other then that, I must say that I agree with the other posters here, spam content on my sites did drop dramatically after I my self started actively filtering anything ending in .co.cc, and I am certain that if you ask people at lets say Akismet, they would tell you a different story in relation to spam then Norton or Trend does.
".co.cc free domain name works exactly like a .com"
has proven to be quite deceptive.
You say:
>>> The most important thing is there is no any notice >>> from Google that there are some disadvantages >>> if the user use sub-domain.
Come on, you knew well about the dangers of a single domain possibly being delisted in search engines as a whole in case of guideline infringements, so why didn't YOU warn your customers, or at least, why didn't you sell subdomains, as would have been honest, instead of "domains" - which was plain wrong?
>Within total co.cc sites, the fraction of malicious sites is not over 0.01%
Maybe if the only thing you class as malicious are sites with viruses on them. The vast majority of these sites are spam, keyword packed, dodgy or phishing websites. Its not in the minority.
>I think if you are a professional, you shouldn’t claim without any proof data.
Sounds like the facts you posted.
>As we offer our all domain lists and zone files to Trend Micro and
Symantec, if you are a internet security company same as Trend Micro and
Symantec, we can also offer all domain lists and zone files to you.
No-one said viruses on websites or infection vectors were the reason the domain was removed. So not relevant.
>As you know, xxx.blogspot.com and facebook.com/xxx have about 70%~80%
that have been just setting there without any caring. On the other
words, those are actually low-quality sites.
Forgotten? Perhaps Old? Yes in a lot of cases Useful? Sometimes actually. Just because its old doesn't mean its always useless.
>If we take much longer time, thousands users will have more loss from it. >We and you all know that someone should take responsibility for their losses which cannot take it back.
So, if I make donations of $100 a day to a charity, then I lose my job, I still obliged to pay the $100 a day because they are used to getting it? Stupidest argument here, if they choose to make their source of income from a FREE source which they know (if they have done any research at all) could disappear in moments, that is their own problem not Google's.
They can always get their money back!! All £0.00 of it! Well except the money they gave you because I bet YOU aren't offering refunds are you!
Try addressing the REAL programs with the domain, the fact its domainated by people engaging in immoral and unscrupulous practices to make money and perform illegal activities. When the copyright offences, phishing sites and other crap is removed from the domain it will come back to Google. Until then, enjoy your spammy domain, well until Bing decide to block it as well.
Oh and lying to your customers and expecting Google to do YOUR job of letting them know that YOU got them banned is also very unprofessional.
> We and you all know that someone should take responsibility for their losses which cannot take it back.
As the domain name holder, wouldn't that be your responsibility? Since technically it was your business practices that were the primary causes leading to their removal from the search results?
Also, why not, if you believe your sub-domains are all pristine and you've resolved the issues that got your domain de-listed, simply apply for a reconsideration like all the other domain owners? I'm fairly certain that's the process needed to move this issue forward, and I'm very certain Google will be happy to have a look at your domain and determine if it meets their guidelines.
Good riddance to bad rubbish tbh - when I have reported malicious sites in the past no-one there gave a crap. Now the s**t has hit the fan for you, you deice to try and say you do something about it? Rubbish!
Good bye to all those cr@p sites you let get registered and let remain live!
It is my sincere hope that the wayback machine, bing, yahoo, ask and AOL follow suit and de-index co.cc, THE MOST SPAMMED, worthless domain on the Interwebs...
and my heartfelt thanks goes out to Google for this bold action!
Hi James, notwithstanding all the low quality spam sites that you have on your domain, I will highlight the phishing activities on it and will refer to this report from ICANN's Anti-Phishing Working Group;
• If we counted these unique subdomains as “regular” domain names, they would represent 22% of all domains used for phishing.
By removing just one 2L domain, Google have removed a quarter of all those phishing sites ! Thats a significant figure and Google should be applauded for doing so ;)
As Luzie explained, your apparent business model is based on deceit to legitimate customers who are nieve enough to pay for such a service. Hopefully your company will apologise and compensate them for any consequential losses that they may incur.
I will go further and question whether .co.cc is actually in cahoots with the Avalanche group ?
>>luzie ============================= I think you might misunderstand what I want to say. Please look at term of service in the blogspot and google Apps. There is no article mentioning if the user use SLD domain for their customdomain, it is risky. Nevertheless, hundreds of thousands blogspot and google-site that users use co.cc domain with their customdomain were de-indexed. It is not make any sense or illegal thing to do. ** I think you made hasty judgment to choose Mr. Pelagic’s reply as “ Best answer”
>>Pelagic ============================ "40% of phishing subdomains were on CO.CC" means similar to 40% of phishing TLD were on .com" What do you think how many percentage will take sub-domains of .co.cc within sub-domains in the world? 70%? 80%? If we consider this percentage, 40% is not big portion. The most common using domain should have the many malicious domains --- That’s just logic.
In addition, the data was in 2010 and not it’s 2011. We had already Shinkhole to tens of thousands of malicious domains that we got from Trend Micro and Symantec at the end of 2010. Since then, once we get suspicious malware lists from many internet security companies, we keep blocking those sites.
Moreover, Google's anti-malware team supplied about 6000 suspicious malware lists to us in October 2010.
Therefore, we are sure that there is no highlight for co.cc in 2011 reports.
As you said, "Google should be applauded for doing so" but this is not applauded for doing that co.cc was de-indexed. I only think that they want to the simplest way they can do “right now". Malicious codes producer are not go away although Google de-indexed co.cc. They can use another domain which does not contain any minimum filtering system.
In my opinion, the best solution is Google can cooperate with internet security companies and sub-domain companies to share malicious domain lists and malware codes information and to maintain prompt Shinkhole those malicious domains.
I believe many internet security companies will agree with me.
The users do not have any liability to make a quality site. Since Google robot is too powerful, it collect not only low quality sites but also personal information and credit information. As I mentioned before, blogspot, facebook and wordpress have 70~80% of low quality web pages. Does Google can deindex those?
Are you trying to spread yet another inaccuracy to obfuscate things? >>> There is no article mentioning if the user use SLD >>> domain for their
customdomain, it is risky.
Why? What you describe is users that have own second level domains (SLDs), hosting content on Blogspot. That's not risky, and even if Blogspot got banned, the independent SLDs would stay indexed.
>>> Nevertheless, hundreds of thousands blogspot
>>> and google-site that users use co.cc domain with >>> their customdomain were
de-indexed.
No, no, it's exactly the other way around with co*cc, people host their content elsewhere but use a co*cc subdomain as their URL. It's exactly the opposite thing of what custom domains hosting content on Blogspot do!
>>** I think you made hasty judgment to choose Mr. Pelagic’s reply as “ Best answer”
Why? Because you don't like the facts?
>>What do you think how many percentage will take sub-domains of .co.cc within sub-domains in the world? 70%? 80%? If we consider this percentage, 40% is not big portion.
approx 50%, so yes, its a VERY VERY big portion..... seriously 22% of the world's phishing sites...... Thats a much much higher ration than average.
>>We had already Shinkhole to tens of thousands of malicious domains that
we got from Trend Micro and Symantec at the end of 2010. Since then, once we get suspicious malware lists from many internet security companies, we keep blocking those sites.
And back to talking about viruses again... we aren't talking about Malware....
>> In my opinion, the best solution is Google can cooperate with
internet security companies and sub-domain companies to share malicious
domain lists and malware codes information and to maintain prompt
Shinkhole those malicious domains.
They did, hence .co.cc been blocked, been about the most malicious TLD about, got blocked.
>Since Google robot is too powerful, it collect not only low quality sites but also personal information and credit information.
[sarcasm]Honest! It can read your mind if you aren't wearing a tinfoil hat as well!!! [/sarcasm]
Seriously, at least try to leave out the blatant lies, your case was thin enough already before you made it even worse.
Which one is most valuable to you whether your mobile phone or your mobile phone number? After the domains change, it takes too much longer time to be index in the Google for those domains. You should know that the blogspot which is using co.cc as custom-domain has incredibly reduced its visitors. In addition, if the user changes to another domain as custom-domain, they might lose their traffic coming from another search engine (yahoo,msn..)
wtf? how shamefully biased can you be?! first of all, the blog post loaded just minutes ago, but the poor owner is likely exceeding free host's bandwidth allowance. :-D moreover, it's a personal site about Texas Instruments calculators with several homemade programs and games! and while using JS extensively, the site is fully accessible (in w3m or lynx, for example). if that's not worth indexing, I don't know what is, but I know of countless .com sites of much poorer quality and with completely worthless content! tldr; gfy, kxbai
>>>Since Google robot is too powerful, it collect not only low quality
sites but also personal information and credit information.
Please provide evidence to support this then. Because its a lie. The only information the bot collects is publically posted info. If you don't post it in the public domain then the bot doesn't collect it.
You stated that "After the domains change, it takes too much longer time to be index in the Google for those domains.", a legitimate service using Google that have set up their account with Webmaster Tools will be able to provide Google with their new URL using the nice "Change URL" tool, allowing them to change their domain to a more prominent TLD and continue their operations like before. I highly doubt Google dropped the already indexed sites so you they will retain their search rank (if they had one).
You also mention blogspot not warning users, it's not blogspots place to warn a user that their domain might be blocked or seized, and as previously stated their blog still exists, it's just not indexed under the .co.cc domain. They are free to apply a new domain here as well.
Errr... that page clearly says its accessing PUBLIC information, from a PUBLIC source.... its warning you that you may have published personal details in a public area...... Also the exact opposite of what you are claiming.
There is no personal or credit information been gathered there, that's
PUBLIC information, available to everyone and put that way by the
website owner.
Google bot JUST collects public information and makes it searchable, it
does not gather ANY private information unless that information is
posted where anyone can access it. Google also provide several methods
that allow to you to NOT have any pages you don't want in search
accessed.
Since you clearly have no idea how the web or internet technologies work, I'd advise been quiet before you make yourself look even more foolish.
Really Google has done this very wrong... I think there must be some laws which can beat Google in such policies. i case of co.cc google can remove spam and phishing sites but not the whole domain. James Kim have done a lot of hard work to bring it to such level. So, Google must reindex it.
Google hasn't broken any laws, they index websites, they decide what they want their own website to display. If they decide "we don't want OUR website to show links to sites that are largely associated with spam", that is their decision and they may do so at a whim.
Feed
This is General Manager from CO.CC. why you deindex .co.cc?
