Remove any Site From Google (even if you don't control it)

Post by _mvuc » Wed, Jul 20, 2011, 6:31 AM UTC

nl wrote: post #57

_mvuc wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, what is the link you supplied supposed to show? To me, it's like someone who, hearing the accuracy of Genesis' creation story challenged due to lack of supporting evidence, replies, "Yes, but Exodus says the same thing." It's the same source making the same claim, with no corroboration. You imagine that someone would have pointed out an honest mistake, but that could take time. Is absence of an immediate counte…

I understand your point, but this is different to Fleischmann–Pons because of Google's capacity to change things. In any case, http://searchengineland.com/google-disables-url-removals-aft... appears to indicate that Google has disabled the tool and are investigating. That indicates to me that it isn't totally fake at least. Maybe it only happens in some circumstances, or maybe there is some other explanation, but I d…

Post by _mvuc » Wed, Jul 20, 2011, 6:43 AM UTC

nl wrote: post #57

_mvuc wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, what is the link you supplied supposed to show? To me, it's like someone who, hearing the accuracy of Genesis' creation story challenged due to lack of supporting evidence, replies, "Yes, but Exodus says the same thing." It's the same source making the same claim, with no corroboration. You imagine that someone would have pointed out an honest mistake, but that could take time. Is absence of an immediate counte…

I understand your point, but this is different to Fleischmann–Pons because of Google's capacity to change things. In any case, http://searchengineland.com/google-disables-url-removals-aft... appears to indicate that Google has disabled the tool and are investigating. That indicates to me that it isn't totally fake at least. Maybe it only happens in some circumstances, or maybe there is some other explanation, but I d…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 20, 2011, 8:08 AM UTC

pbz wrote: post #42

Somewhat related: I wish GWT had a "pattern" removal. With one of my sites, by the time I noticed that certain pages were missing the "noindex" tag Google happily indexed over 4000 pages. Considering the rate Google is crawling those pages it may take years to be removed from the index. Obviously, submitting each link one by one is rather tedious. Hopefully the author is going to release that extension after Google f…

Post by elmomalmo » Wed, Jul 20, 2011, 8:20 AM UTC

ssclafani wrote: post #8

wccrawford wrote: post #5

I think it's sad that he had to resort to publicly releasing this exploit because he couldn't find a way to contact Google about it. In the past, when I've had problems, I couldn't contact them either. They've done a great job at making sure there's no human contacts available. You have to post something in a public forum and hope they'll contact you. (They won't.)

Sending an email to security@google.com will result in a quick response. As part of their bug bounty program Google would have paid $1,000 for this bug if not more.

Post by mike-cardwell » Wed, Jul 20, 2011, 8:21 AM UTC

elmomalmo wrote: post #67

ssclafani wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sending an email to security@google.com will result in a quick response. As part of their bug bounty program Google would have paid $1,000 for this bug if not more.

Hmm, which is more valuable, $1000 or #1 on HN?