Naturally, people can still use http when referencing/linking to a site so this is part of a natural backlink profile.
Hmm..I didn't think of that at all! That is a good point. Does SER make that variation, or should/can I include both HTTP and HTTPS variations...brb...OK; SER *DOES* apparently save both in the Project data pane>>Data>>URL field! Did not know that. Edit All permits this; not sure if you can just add one at a time.
Let me try something else...adding duplicates of a URL....again, brb...WOW! It seems to work, same URL, same protocol! I can then have a project post URLs chosen in backlinks SER creates at a chosen ratio. I have always had projects with URLs at 1:1:1:1..etc... but this opens up new possibilities!!!
What would matter more is that you have an SSL cert on you main site and all other variations of the url redirecting properly to your https:// version especially when and if building links to different variations of the URL.
Hmm...I always test a site I set up even if I think I did the .htaccess right. It's easy to make errors.
One odd thing: Majestic seems to not be able to get to the http www version of a site I have, but on trying to visit myself in a browser, it redirected properly. Wonder why this is..Majestic indicates timeout for www.http on one site and Forbidden 403 on another. (I just checked again, and both redirect properly. ) Anyway...
This make me wonder if the sites that still are using http and showing a "not safe" pop up, this could affect or break a tier structure? Its just a guess, but I would think since it was Gogles big push for SSL, that they would "devalue" sites they are showing as "not safe" and then not following through the link or passing any "authority" to it?
I have wondered the same as I was cheeking Verified URLs for a project recently and came across some "not safe" sites. I think you are likely right; at this point it's just sketchy-seeming, to users, and yeah Google was right on with SSL, for sure, so...can't imagine they like it too much, now so many years later and an SSL Certificate is cheap.
Does it pass link weigh, thought? At a percentage reduced? None? Worth avoiding as targets?
I was one of those people who resisted HTTPS, initially. Not even for a good reason. I guess, really, the cost...figured unless it was e-commerce, or something requiring privacy, then it wasn't needed. But, looking back, that seems naive. I mean, why not? It can't hurt, either way.
@nobodyknows Yes that is true but not all CMS handle it the same like wordpress for example kinda does this for you. But that is what happens all variations should redirect to https so long as its set up properly and you have SSL certificate on the domain.
People sharing links naturally if different ways, this would pick them up or maybe if issues with some bad links maybe not want some variation redirected to main https, I guess
but you can simply do the 301 modyfing the .htaccess file no?
Comments
but you can simply do the 301 modyfing the .htaccess file no?
RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^yourdomain\.com [NC] RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80 RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://www.yourdomain.com/$1 [R,L]you're right , no need to specify port