happened to my company where i work at, final solution? we nuked the site, basically built a different website, different domain and hosting, Appealed the decision on adwords and cross your fingers, that's the only thing that worked, we were losing customers while we were trying to figure out what was going on (we were on month 2 already, dead in the water no ADs being served). While doing research i came upon the conclusion its either machine learning that is using old data and does NOT refresh that often just to save computing power / costs, or googles tech support does not care.
Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
51–60 of 64 posts
Re: Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
#52Just don't do ads
Re: Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
#53I'd bet just about anything that Google uses machine learning to decide whether or not to trust a site for ads. It seems like the only solution that would work at a large enough scale to handle that kind of demand (versus more defined but more labor- and resource-intensive malware/fraud detections). I think that also explains why the review process seems so arbitrary and ineffective - in essence, not even Google know…
> It seems like the only solution that would work at a large enough scale to handle that kind of demand It doesn’t work. These automated systems are flagging a (presumably) benign site and an article yesterday regarding their $5M lawsuit for running a scam ad on their SERP for “Coinbase support” suggest the automated systems can be bypassed too. I’m not saying automated detection can’t be a part of it, but we shouldn…
Point taken; it "works" for certain values of "work."
> They could hire an army of reviewers. They just don’t.
They may actually do that too, but perhaps there are thresholds that must be met for something to reach a reviewer. I have some sympathy for Google here as I work on email security in a high-volume environment. ML is one tool in the box, and human reviewers are another. Everything is a tradeoff between resources, false positives, and false negatives.
At least my organization's customers can contact support if something is going wrong, but for people trying to legitimately use Google Ads, it can be an extremely frustrating situation of shouting into the void. (And getting boilerplate support answers back from the void.)
Re: Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
After years of similar issues, why are you giving them the benefit of the doubt? Especially if they won't explain what the issue is and gave out such ludicrous advice to the OP?
Which similar issue? The other people who were hosting malware who didn't realize it?
I'd say Google them but that product has also become terrible.
Re: Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which similar issue? The other people who were hosting malware who didn't realize it?
There have been quite a few complaints along these lines on HackerNews and elsewhere. Sometimes Google gets it wrong, and then people end up stuck, as you can't contact them.
Did said complainants seem to evince competence or willingness to investigate?
Re: Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
#56[dead]
Re: Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
#57[dead]
Re: Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
#58How can we meaningfully answer the question without knowing what is your website?
Can’t you have some respect to other people’s time?
Re: Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
#59Try to advertise on iSocialize.me
Re: Ask HN: Google Ads Rejected My SaaS as Compromised Site
#60Your domain has a 20+ year ownership history. Are you the first owner? The suggestion that you switch to .com could be a subtle way to tell you that your domain has a bad reputation that cannot be fixed. Once Google thinks a domain is bad, it’s hard to change their mind. If you’re not the first owner, you don’t know what the previous owners did using the domain.
> The suggestion that you switch to .com could be a subtle way to tell you If it is, then they should say what they mean instead.
Yeah, in that case, they're simultaneously hinting that you've been caught in an ML capture net, yet provide you with a means to bypass it, negating the automated mechanism they used to prevent bad behaviour in the first place.