Search Results

Search found 26 results on 2 pages for 'cloaking'.

Page 1/2 | 1 2  | Next Page >

  • SEO - Google and link cleaning / cloaking [closed]

    - by Jens Törnell
    Possible Duplicate: Does the Google spider render JavaScript? This a SEO related question, not a code related one. Googles own link cleaning / cloaking Gå to http://www.google.com and search for something. Hover the title and you will se a link to the page you want to go to. The URL you see when hovering is NOT the link you are clicking on. Instead of clicking you can drag the title a little bit and then hover it. Then you will se the real URL. My own link cleaning / cloaking Go to http://jsfiddle.net/NvmER/1/ and click the link, or look at the code below. You will be "redirected" to http://www.test.com. The real link are http://www.test.com/?event=23 Working code in case jsfiddle don't work If you need to se how it works I pasted a code below. <a class="direct" href="http://www.test.com/?event=23" data-redirect="http://www.test.com">Länk</a>? $(document).ready(function() { $("a.direct").live("mousedown", function(e){ var oldurl = $(this).attr('href'); var newurl = $(this).attr('data-redirect'); $(this).attr('href', newurl); }); });? Question Is this ok with Google? It's done with javascript. If you have an answer, link to a source or test to support it.

    Read the article

  • Could Ajax + Caching be seen as cloaking?

    - by Angel
    I have a website where we use a technique to speed up loading times based in a combination of AJAX + caching. Basically, when we have a section in a page with content which is slow to retrieve, we first look if it's cached. If it is, then we serve the content, if it's not, we serve a placeholder and then make an AJAX call in the client to retrieve the content, wich is now cached for subsequent requests. As a consecuence, sometimes you get the entire page content in the first request, and sometimes you get those placeholders, wich get filled inmediatly with the responses of the AJAX request. You can see an example in the results count by category in the right column of this page: http://www.inzoco.com/crits/2-1-3-28-185-0-28079-0-0/listado-piso-en-alquiler-en-madrid-madrid.aspx I'm worried if it could be seen as cloaking by search engines because if you make a request for a page wich content isn't cached and then ask again for the same page, you would get different responses, the first with the placeholders and AJAX requests and the second one with al the content rendered.

    Read the article

  • is a negative text-indent considered cloaking?

    - by John Isaacks
    I am using the negative-text-indent technique I learned to show a text-image to the user, while hiding the corresponding actual text. This way the user sees the fancy styled text while search engines can still index it. However I am started to think this sounds like cloaking since I am serving different content to the user vs the spider. However, I am not using this in a deceitful way. Plus it seems like this is a popular technique. So is it SEO-safe or is it cloaking? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • 2 sites each in a different country with 1 set of content (cloaking)

    - by Greg
    Hi, I have a question re: cloaking. I have a friend who has a business in Canada and the UK. Currently the .ca site is hosted on Godaddy. The co.uk domain is registered (with uk ip address) with domainmonster and is using a cloaked/framed redirect to the .ca site. As a result (my assumption) the .ca site is indexed fine by google, the .co.uk is not. The content is generic for both sites. How do I point the .co.uk site directly to the content independently (preferably without duplicating the content hosting in the UK), so that for instance if the .ca domain was taken away altogether the .co.uk domain would remain an entity in itself from Google's point of view? Does Google index a generic set of content and then associate different country domains with that content? I hope I have explained this ok. Thanks, Greg

    Read the article

  • SEO implications of blocking users viewing more than X pages

    - by Noam
    I'm considering the option to block non-premium users after viewing more than X pages. This basically means blocking the content after a fixed amount of pageviews per session. I can either: Keep displaying full-content for Search Engines. Can this be considered cloaking? Keep the real content in the background, and a pop-up that makes it not-viewable (like quora does). Can this make pages rank lower?

    Read the article

  • Is this form of cloaking likely to be penalised?

    - by Flo
    I'm looking to create a website which is considerably javascript heavy, built with backbone.js and most content being passed as JSON and loaded via backbone. I just needed some advice or opinions on likely hood of my website being penalised using the method of serving plain HTML (text, images, everything) to search engine bots and an js front-end version to normal users. This is my basic plan for my site: I plan on having the first request to any page being html which will only give about 1/4 of the page and there after load the last 3/4 with backbone js. Therefore non javascript users get a 'bit' of the experience. Once that new user has visited and detected to have js will have a cookie saved on their machine and requests from there after will be AJAX only. Example If (AJAX || HasJSCookie) { // Pass JSON } Search Engine server content: That entire experience of loading via AJAX will be stripped if a google bot for example is detected, the same content will be servered but all html. I thought about just allowing search engines to index the first 1/4 of content but as I'm considered about inner links and picking up every bit of content I thought it would be better to give search engines the entire content. I plan to do this by just detected a list of user agents and knowing if it's a bot or not. If (Bot) { //server plain html } In addition I plan to make clean URLs for the entire website despite full AJAX, therefore providing AJAX content to www.example.com/#/page and normal html to www.example.com/page is kind of our of the question. Would rather avoid the practice of using # when there are technology such as HTML 5 push state is around. So my question is really just asking the opinion of the masses on if it's likely that my website will be penalised? And do you suggest an alternative which avoids 'noscript' method

    Read the article

  • Website Health Check - Keyword Blunders - Part 2

    Website Health Check is becoming an integral part of Search Engine Optimization (SEO). The reason is that it helps to find mistakes in websites that are commonly unnoticed. Eventually, it means the difference between coming up as the first or last result in a search engine query. A small part regarding keywords, such as keyword density, keyword stuffing, spelling errors, cloaking, etc., is explained here.

    Read the article

  • dns hosting - url forwarding - hiding forwarded url?

    - by jeremycollins
    I have free dns hosting with the domain registrar and I'd like the dns hosted domain www.example.com to display contents of www.myotherlongdomain.com. I only have 301/302/iframe forwarding options, however I want to mask the redirected (longdomain) url. If I use frames, users can view the source and see the (longdomain) url the contents are coming from. How can I hide it so it always displays www.example.com? There is no cloaking/masking option with the registrar. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Avoid Ajax loaded content for search engine bots

    - by Majiy
    A website I run has a lot of content that is being loaded using Ajax. The reason for using Ajax is that the content generation takes some time (a few seconds), because it loads data from other websites using their respective APIs. My concern is, that search engine bots will not see any useful content. The solution I've been thinking about would be to serve search engine bots differently, so that the content will be displayed directly for them. Technically, this would not be a big problem. My question is: Will search engines (read: Google) consider this behaviour as website cloaking? Are there other concerns I might not have considered?

    Read the article

  • Using PHP Redirect Script together with Custom Fields (WordPress)? [on hold]

    - by Alex Scherer
    I am currently trying to make yoast's link cloaking script ( Yoast.com script manual // Github Script files ) work together with the Wordpress plugin Advanced Custom Fields. The script fetches 2 values (redirect id, redirect url) via GET and then redirects to this particular URL which is defined in a .txt file called redirects.txt I would like to change the script, so that I can define both the id and redirection URL via custom fields on each post in my WP dashboard.. I would be really happy if someone could help me to code something that does the same as the script above but without using a redirects.txt file to save the values but furthermore gets those values from custom fields. Best regards ! Alex

    Read the article

  • How much time it needs google webmaster yo generate content keyword if url masking is enabled? [closed]

    - by user1439968
    Possible Duplicate: What is domain “masking” or “cloaking”? Why should it be avoided for a new web site? my real domain is domain.in. But url masking has been enabled and the masked url is domain2.in .. In that case i have added d url bputdoubts.21backlogs.in to google webmaster a week ago but content keyword hasn't been generated. In this case when can I expect to get the content keywords generated ?? And is there a problem for getting visitors from google search if url masking is enabled ?

    Read the article

  • Google Authorship: can I display:none for link to profile?

    - by RubenGeert
    I'd like to have my 'mugshot' in Google's SERPs but I couldn't care less about Google+. I don't really want to link my website to Google+ either. Can I use CSS display:none; on the link leading to my profile and still have authorship, which looks like <a href='https://plus.google.com/111823012258578917399?rel=author' rel='nofollow'>Google</a>? Will the nofollow attribute here spoil things? I don't want to lose 'link juice' on Google+ if I don't have to. Now Google should crawl only the HTML but I'm sure they'll figure out the link is not visible (perhaps it's technically even cloaking. Does anybody have experience with this situation? And do I really have to become (reasonably) active on Google+ in order for authorship to show? This answer suggests I do but I didn't read anything on that in Google's guidelines.

    Read the article

  • Best way to redirect users back to the pretty URL who land on the _escaped_fragment_ one?

    - by Ryan
    I am working on an AJAX site and have successfully implemented Google's AJAX recommendation by creating _escape_fragment_ versions of each page for it to index. Thus each page has 2 URLs: pretty: example.com#!blog ugly: example.com?_escaped_fragment_=blog However, I have noticed in my analytics that some users are arriving on the site via the "ugly" URL and am looking for a clean way to redirect them to the pretty URL without impacting Google's ability to index the site. I have considered using a 301 redirect in the head but fear that Googlebot might try to follow it and end up in an endless loop. I have also considered using a JavaScript redirect that Googlebot wouldn't execute but fear that Google may interpret this as cloaking and penalize the website. Is there a good, clean, acceptable way to redirect real users away from the ugly URL if for some reason or another they end up arriving at the site that way?

    Read the article

  • Search Engine Query Word Order

    - by EoghanM
    I've pages with titles like 'Alpha with Beta'. For every such page, there is an inverse page 'Beta with Alpha'. Both pages link to each other. When someone on Google searches for 'Beta with Alpha', I'd like them to land on the correct page, but sometimes 'Alpha with Beta' ranks higher (or vice versa). I was thinking of inspecting the referral link when a visitor arrives on my site, and silently redirecting them to the correct page based on what they actually searched for. Just wondering if this could be penalized by Google as 'cloaking/sneaky redirects'? Or is there a better way to ensure that the correct page on my site ranks higher for the matching query?

    Read the article

  • SharePoint Conference 2012&ndash;How To Find Me

    - by MOSSLover
    Hey guys I will be at the conference if you don’t follow me on twitter and you want to find me.  Look around the Women in SharePoint area in the Community Lounge.  If you don’t find me at the Community Lounge then I would say try to look at the Planet Technologies booth for me.  If you don’t find me in that booth then try Booth #22 the SharePoint Pavilion.  If I’m not in any of these places I’m either in a session, sleeping, running, or wearing a cloaking device.  You can ask me all kinds of questions about Planet, Women in SharePoint, and such.  I can try to answer the questions as best I can or direct you to someone smarter.  See you all at SPC 12! Technorati Tags: SPC12,SharePoint

    Read the article

  • Google va renforcer ses mesures anti-cloacking, un changement important qui pourrait impacter les sites mobiles et les contenus riches

    Google va renforcer ses mesures anti-cloacking Un changement important qui pourrait impacter les sites mobiles et les contenus riches Comme résolution du nouvel an, Google a décidé de resserrer l'étau sur le « cloaking », cette pratique qui consiste à présenter aux moteurs de recherche un contenu différent de celui présenté à l'utilisateur. Souvent utilisée à des fins de spam, cette technique est réprimée par Google et les autres moteurs de recherche. Pourtant, de nombreux webmasters la trouvent utile pour améliorer le référencement de sites conçus avec des technologies encore mal prises en compte par les bots des moteurs de recherche, comme le Flash ou le Rich Medi...

    Read the article

  • In addition to Google's First Flick Free, should you whitelist search engine bots past a paywall?

    - by tobek
    Our site has subscription-only pages - non-subscribed visitors see a snippet preview. As per Google's FCF requirements, your first 5 hits to a subscriber-only pages with .google. as the referrer, you see the full page. In addition to this, should we whitelist search engine bots so that they can index the full content? I assume this is not required for Google, which can use FCF to index our content, but what about other search engines? Is this considered cloaking? My gut says that whitelisting bots past the paywall is bad practice., but I wanted to confirm - any evidence or references would be amazing.

    Read the article

  • In addition to Google's First Click Free, should you whitelist search engine bots past a paywall?

    - by tobek
    Our site has subscription-only pages - non-subscribed visitors see a snippet preview. As per Google's FCF requirements, your first 5 hits to a subscriber-only pages with .google. as the referrer, you see the full page. In addition to this, should we whitelist search engine bots so that they can index the full content? I assume this is not required for Google, which can use FCF to index our content, but what about other search engines? Is this considered cloaking? My gut says that whitelisting bots past the paywall is bad practice., but I wanted to confirm - any evidence or references would be amazing.

    Read the article

  • Week in Geek: 4chan Falls Victim to DDoS Attack Edition

    - by Asian Angel
    This week we learned how to tweak the low battery action on a Windows 7 laptop, access an eBook collection anywhere in the world, “extend iPad battery life, batch resize photos, & sync massive music collections”, went on a reign of destruction with Snow Crusher, and had fun decorating our desktops with abstract icon collections. Photo by pasukaru76. Random Geek Links We have included extra news article goodness to help you catch up on any developments that you may have missed during the holiday break this past week. Note: The three 27C3 articles listed here represent three different presentations at the 27th Chaos Communication Congress hacker conference. 4chan victim of DDoS as FBI investigates role in PayPal attack Users of 4chan may have gotten a taste of their own medicine after the site was knocked offline by a DDoS attack from an unknown origin early Thursday morning. Report: FBI seizes server in probe of WikiLeaks attacks The FBI has seized a server in Texas as part of its hunt for the groups behind the pro-WikiLeaks denial-of-service attacks launched in December against PayPal, Visa, MasterCard, and others. Mozilla exposes older user-account database Mozilla has disabled 44,000 older user accounts for its Firefox add-ons site after a security researcher found part of a database of the account information on a publicly available server. Data breach affects 4.9 million Honda customers Japanese automaker Honda has put some 2.2 million customers in the United States on a security breach alert after a database containing information on the owners and their cars was hacked. Chinese Trojan discovered in Android games An Android-based Trojan called “Geinimi” has been discovered in the wild and the Trojan is capable of sending personal information to remote servers and exhibits botnet-like behavior. 27C3 presentation claims many mobiles vulnerable to SMS attacks According to security experts, an ‘SMS of death’ threatens to disable many current Sony Ericsson, Samsung, Motorola, Micromax and LG mobiles. 27C3: GSM cell phones even easier to tap Security researchers have demonstrated how open source software on a number of revamped, entry-level cell phones can decrypt and record mobile phone calls in the GSM network. 27C3: danger lurks in PDF documents Security researcher Julia Wolf has pointed out numerous, previously hardly known, security problems in connection with Adobe’s PDF standard. Critical update for WordPress A critical update has been made available for WordPress in the form of version 3.0.4. The update fixes a security bug in WordPress’s KSES library. McAfee Labs Predicts Geolocation, Mobile Devices and Apple Will Top the List of Targets for Emerging Threats in 2011 The list comprises 2010’s most buzzed about platforms and services, including Google’s Android, Apple’s iPhone, foursquare, Google TV and the Mac OS X platform, which are all expected to become major targets for cybercriminals. McAfee Labs also predicts that politically motivated attacks will be on the rise. Windows Phone 7 piracy materializes with FreeMarketplace A proof-of-concept application, FreeMarketplace, that allows any Windows Phone 7 application to be downloaded and installed free of charge has been developed. Empty email accounts, and some bad buzz for Hotmail In the past few days, a number of Hotmail users have been complaining about a rather disconcerting issue: their Hotmail accounts, some up to 10 years old, appear completely empty.  No emails, no folders, nothing, just what appears to be a new account. Reports: Nintendo warns of 3DS risk for kids Nintendo has reportedly issued a warning that the 3DS, its eagerly awaited glasses-free 3D portable gaming device, should not be used by children under 6 when the gadget is in 3D-viewing mode. Google eyes ‘cloaking’ as next antispam target Google plans to take a closer look at the practice of “cloaking,” or presenting one look to a Googlebot crawling one’s site while presenting another look to users. Facebook, Twitter stock trading drawing SEC eye? The high degree of investor interest in shares of hot Silicon Valley companies that aren’t yet publicly traded–like Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Zynga–may be leading to scrutiny from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Random TinyHacker Links Photo by jcraveiro. Exciting Software Set for Release in 2011 A few bloggers from great websites such as How-To Geek, Guiding Tech and 7 Tutorials took the time to sit down and talk about their software wishes for 2011. Take the time to read it and share… Wikileaks Infopr0n An infographic detailing the quest to plug WikiLeaks. The New York Times Guide to Mobile Apps A growing collection of all mobile app coverage by the New York Times as well as lists of favorite apps from Times writers. 7,000,000,000 (Video) A fascinating look at the world’s population via National Geographic Magazine. Super User Questions Check out the great answers to these hot questions from Super User. How to use a Personal computer as a Linux web server for development purposes? How to link processing power of old computers together? Free virtualization tool for testing suspicious files? Why do some actions not work with Remote Desktop? What is the simplest way to send a large batch of pictures to a distant friend or colleague? How-To Geek Weekly Article Recap Had a busy week and need to get caught up on your HTG reading? Then sit back and relax while enjoying these hot posts full of how-to roundup goodness. The 50 Best How-To Geek Windows Articles of 2010 The 20 Best How-To Geek Explainer Topics for 2010 The 20 Best How-To Geek Linux Articles of 2010 How to Search Just the Site You’re Viewing Using Google Search Ask the Readers: Backing Your Files Up – Local Storage versus the Cloud One Year Ago on How-To Geek Need more how-to geekiness for your weekend? Then look through this great batch of articles from one year ago that focus on dual-booting and O.S. installation goodness. Dual Boot Your Pre-Installed Windows 7 Computer with Vista Dual Boot Your Pre-Installed Windows 7 Computer with XP How To Setup a USB Flash Drive to Install Windows 7 Dual Boot Your Pre-Installed Windows 7 Computer with Ubuntu Easily Install Ubuntu Linux with Windows Using the Wubi Installer The Geek Note We hope that you and your families have had a terrific holiday break as everyone prepares to return to work and school this week. Remember to keep those great tips coming in to us at [email protected]! Photo by pjbeardsley. Latest Features How-To Geek ETC The 20 Best How-To Geek Linux Articles of 2010 The 50 Best How-To Geek Windows Articles of 2010 The 20 Best How-To Geek Explainer Topics for 2010 How to Disable Caps Lock Key in Windows 7 or Vista How to Use the Avira Rescue CD to Clean Your Infected PC The Complete List of iPad Tips, Tricks, and Tutorials Tune Pop Enhances Android Music Notifications Another Busy Night in Gotham City Wallpaper Classic Super Mario Brothers Theme for Chrome and Iron Experimental Firefox Builds Put Tabs on the Title Bar (Available for Download) Android Trojan Found in the Wild Chaos, Panic, and Disorder Wallpaper

    Read the article

  • Setting domain name to web application [on hold]

    - by aditk
    I have a website and I have kept the structure to be: Website Web Application 1 Web Application 2 Now, I want to access my website at example.com and access web applications using webapp1.example.com or webapp2.example.com; I have a control panel for my domain name from where I have set up a “web forward” to my server. From what I have done, I am getting to see my IP address when I type in domain name. Yes, I have disabled cloaking here! How I would like it to be is, when I access example.com and then navigate to other pages, they should be shown in the address bar, e.g. http://example.com/firstpage.aspx and so forth. Is the structure I have set up a good one?

    Read the article

  • Getting rank for keywords that I don't want to appear on my website [duplicate]

    - by Rober
    This question already has an answer here: Which keyword should I use. colors or colours or a combination of both? 2 answers One of my products has two names. One of them is what I consider correct and thus it is what I want to appear on my website. The other name is incorrect for me, so I would like to avoid it. But I know that many people will search my product using the "bad" name. How could I get the "bad" name indexed for my site on search engines even if nobody can read it there? Of course, I want to do it "legally" so that no engine will ban my site considering it as cloaking, black hat SEO, etc... EDIT: Having that "bad" name on my backlinks is not an option. For example I would perceive user reviews connecting my site to that word as a negative point. Maybe having my site as a search result for that word could be negative as well, but I think it is worth it.

    Read the article

  • Transferring users and search engines to a new domain

    - by eftpotrm
    I've been asked to take over the maintnance of an existing site that's being reworked. At present it's serving localised content for several languages, but via a fairly unhelpful mechanism that means essentially search engines only have it indexed in English and any deep links will de facto appear in English as well. So, new localised sites are being built under separate domains - not just for this, there's other benefits. What we're then looking to do is to redirect users correctly to the new site, where appropriate. For humans this isn't a problem. We can send them through a gateway page on their first site visit, grab their language preference and put it in a cookie, then redirect them to the new localised content as soon as it's available. For search engines, this isn't so good... In principle I'm happy to simply bypass the gateway page and redirect known spiders to the new site, but this means we're serving radically different content (different URL even!) to human and robot users. Won't this therefore be regarded as cloaking and cause us grief? Anyone know a better way to handle this?

    Read the article

  • Why does SQL 2005 SSIS component install fail?

    - by Ducain
    I am trying to install SSIS on our production SQL 2005 SP2 box. Each time I try, the install/setup screen results in failure, starting with the native client, and moving on down. Screen shots below show what I see: Here is the result of clicking on the status link to the right of the native client after the install failed: === Verbose logging started: 3/28/2012 16:38:08 Build type: SHIP UNICODE 3.01.4000.4042 Calling process: C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Setup Bootstrap\setup.exe === MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:08:875]: Resetting cached policy values MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:08:875]: Machine policy value 'Debug' is 0 MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:08:875]: ******* RunEngine: ******* Product: {F9B3DD02-B0B3-42E9-8650-030DFF0D133D} ******* Action: ******* CommandLine: ********** MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:08:875]: Client-side and UI is none or basic: Running entire install on the server. MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:08:875]: Grabbed execution mutex. MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:08:875]: Cloaking enabled. MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:08:875]: Attempting to enable all disabled priveleges before calling Install on Server MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:08:875]: Incrementing counter to disable shutdown. Counter after increment: 0 MSI (s) (90:F0) [16:38:08:875]: Grabbed execution mutex. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:875]: Resetting cached policy values MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:875]: Machine policy value 'Debug' is 0 MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:875]: ******* RunEngine: ******* Product: {F9B3DD02-B0B3-42E9-8650-030DFF0D133D} ******* Action: ******* CommandLine: ********** MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:875]: Machine policy value 'DisableUserInstalls' is 0 MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: Warning: Local cached package 'C:\WINDOWS\Installer\65eb99.msi' is missing. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: User policy value 'SearchOrder' is 'nmu' MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: User policy value 'DisableMedia' is 0 MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: Machine policy value 'AllowLockdownMedia' is 0 MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Media enabled only if package is safe. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Looking for sourcelist for product {F9B3DD02-B0B3-42E9-8650-030DFF0D133D} MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Adding {F9B3DD02-B0B3-42E9-8650-030DFF0D133D}; to potential sourcelist list (pcode;disk;relpath). MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Now checking product {F9B3DD02-B0B3-42E9-8650-030DFF0D133D} MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Media is enabled for product. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Attempting to use LastUsedSource from source list. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Trying source C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Setup Bootstrap\Cache\. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Source is invalid due to invalid package code (product code doesn't match). MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: Note: 1: 1706 2: -2147483646 3: sqlncli.msi MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Processing net source list. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: Note: 1: 1706 2: -2147483647 3: sqlncli.msi MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:08:890]: SOURCEMGMT: Processing media source list. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: SOURCEMGMT: Trying media source F:\. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: Note: 1: 2203 2: F:\sqlncli.msi 3: -2147287038 MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: SOURCEMGMT: Source is invalid due to missing/inaccessible package. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: Note: 1: 1706 2: -2147483647 3: sqlncli.msi MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: SOURCEMGMT: Processing URL source list. MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: Note: 1: 1402 2: UNKNOWN\URL 3: 2 MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: Note: 1: 1706 2: -2147483647 3: sqlncli.msi MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: Note: 1: 1706 2: 3: sqlncli.msi MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: SOURCEMGMT: Failed to resolve source MSI (s) (90:D4) [16:38:09:921]: MainEngineThread is returning 1612 MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:09:921]: Decrementing counter to disable shutdown. If counter >= 0, shutdown will be denied. Counter after decrement: -1 MSI (c) (DC:00) [16:38:09:921]: MainEngineThread is returning 1612 === Verbose logging stopped: 3/28/2012 16:38:09 === Here is the log visible when I click the failed status for MSXML6: === Verbose logging started: 3/28/2012 16:38:12 Build type: SHIP UNICODE 3.01.4000.4042 Calling process: C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Setup Bootstrap\setup.exe === MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:250]: Resetting cached policy values MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:250]: Machine policy value 'Debug' is 0 MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:250]: ******* RunEngine: ******* Product: {56EA8BC0-3751-4B93-BC9D-6651CC36E5AA} ******* Action: ******* CommandLine: ********** MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:250]: Client-side and UI is none or basic: Running entire install on the server. MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:250]: Grabbed execution mutex. MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:250]: Cloaking enabled. MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:250]: Attempting to enable all disabled priveleges before calling Install on Server MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:250]: Incrementing counter to disable shutdown. Counter after increment: 0 MSI (s) (90:58) [16:38:12:265]: Grabbed execution mutex. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: Resetting cached policy values MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: Machine policy value 'Debug' is 0 MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: ******* RunEngine: ******* Product: {56EA8BC0-3751-4B93-BC9D-6651CC36E5AA} ******* Action: ******* CommandLine: ********** MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: Machine policy value 'DisableUserInstalls' is 0 MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: Warning: Local cached package 'C:\WINDOWS\Installer\ce6d56e.msi' is missing. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: User policy value 'SearchOrder' is 'nmu' MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: User policy value 'DisableMedia' is 0 MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: Machine policy value 'AllowLockdownMedia' is 0 MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Media enabled only if package is safe. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Looking for sourcelist for product {56EA8BC0-3751-4B93-BC9D-6651CC36E5AA} MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Adding {56EA8BC0-3751-4B93-BC9D-6651CC36E5AA}; to potential sourcelist list (pcode;disk;relpath). MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Now checking product {56EA8BC0-3751-4B93-BC9D-6651CC36E5AA} MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Media is enabled for product. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Attempting to use LastUsedSource from source list. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Trying source d:\2a2ac35788eea9066bae01\. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: Note: 1: 2203 2: d:\2a2ac35788eea9066bae01\msxml6.msi 3: -2147287037 MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Source is invalid due to missing/inaccessible package. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: Note: 1: 1706 2: -2147483647 3: msxml6.msi MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Processing net source list. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: Note: 1: 1706 2: -2147483647 3: msxml6.msi MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:265]: SOURCEMGMT: Processing media source list. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: SOURCEMGMT: Trying media source F:\. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: Note: 1: 2203 2: F:\msxml6.msi 3: -2147287038 MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: SOURCEMGMT: Source is invalid due to missing/inaccessible package. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: Note: 1: 1706 2: -2147483647 3: msxml6.msi MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: SOURCEMGMT: Processing URL source list. MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: Note: 1: 1402 2: UNKNOWN\URL 3: 2 MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: Note: 1: 1706 2: -2147483647 3: msxml6.msi MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: Note: 1: 1706 2: 3: msxml6.msi MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: SOURCEMGMT: Failed to resolve source MSI (s) (90:DC) [16:38:12:296]: MainEngineThread is returning 1612 MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:296]: Decrementing counter to disable shutdown. If counter >= 0, shutdown will be denied. Counter after decrement: -1 MSI (c) (DC:58) [16:38:12:296]: MainEngineThread is returning 1612 === Verbose logging stopped: 3/28/2012 16:38:12 === When I click on the failed status for SSIS, no log file appears at all. To be honest, I'm not even sure where to start on this one - never guessed it would be so much trouble to add a component right from the disk. Any help or pointers whatsoever would be greatly appreciated. If any more details are needed, please ask - I'd be glad to add them.

    Read the article

  • Should EICAR be updated to test the revision of Antivirus system?

    - by makerofthings7
    I'm posting this here since programmers write viruses, and AV software. They also have the best knowledge of heuristics and how AV systems work (cloaking etc). The EICAR test file was used to functionally test an antivirus system. As it stands today almost every AV system will flag EICAR as being a "test" virus. For more information on this historic test virus please click here. Currently the EICAR test file is only good for testing the presence of an AV solution, but it doesn't check for engine file or DAT file up-to-dateness. In other words, why do a functional test of a system that could have definition files that are more than 10 years old. With the increase of zero day threats it doesn't make much sense to functionally test your system using EICAR. That being said, I think EICAR needs to be updated/modified to be effective test that works in conjunction with an AV management solution. This question is about real world testing, without using live viruses... which is the intent of the original EICAR. That being said I'm proposing a new EICAR file format with the appendage of an XML blob that will conditionally cause the Antivirus engine to respond. X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-EXTENDED-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H* <?xml version="1.0"?> <engine-valid-from>2010-1-1Z</engine-valid-from> <signature-valid-from>2010-1-1Z</signature-valid-from> <authkey>MyTestKeyHere</authkey> In this sample, the antivirus engine would only alert on the EICAR file if both the signature or engine file is equal to or newer than the valid-from date. Also there is a passcode that will protect the usage of EICAR to the system administrator. If you have a backgound in "Test Driven Design" TDD for software you may get that all I'm doing is applying the principals of TDD to my infrastructure. Based on your experience and contacts how can I make this idea happen?

    Read the article

1 2  | Next Page >