Serps Cloaking and SEO penalty question

[M4DM4X]

Hi,
I'm implementing cloaking on my site for the first time, it's a simple php script that filters google bots and users based on user agents, not IPs, serving the content to bots and sending legit visitors straight to my affiliate link.
I want to keep it simple and don't want to use a third party service.
I guess this technique will be detected quickly by google due to the low visitor time onsite (high bounce rate) and will hurt the site, right ?
Or will it fly under the radar for a few months, allowing enough time to make some money?
What's your experience with such a script?
Thanks for sharing

 

[Steptoe]

Hi,
I'm implementing cloaking on my site for the first time, it's a simple php script that filters google bots and users based on user agents, not IPs, serving the content to bots and sending legit visitors straight to my affiliate link.
I want to keep it simple and don't want to use a third party service.
I guess this technique will be detected quickly by google due to the low visitor time onsite (high bounce rate) and will hurt the site, right ?
Or will it fly under the radar for a few months, allowing enough time to make some money?
What's your experience with such a script?
Thanks for sharing

If done correctly it shouldn't be seen as a bounce, as Google won't see any analytics code, and so won't be able to track such actions. If for some reason you showed legit visitors a html page with a javascript redirect to your affiliate link, and included analytics code on that page, then yes that could be tracked. But the way you're doing it it sounds like the user will go straight to the affiliate link via a server-side redirect.

However, cloaking based on useragent alone is certainly not water-tight. Though as it's your first time using cloaking, treat it as an experiment.

 

[MajestySEO]

According to Google, cloaking like this is a direct violation of their spam policies. You can check the official guidelines below, focus on the "Cloaking" section. So yes, this kind of setup might work short term, but it’s not worth the risk if you are building a serious project.

https://developers.google.com/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies

 

[M4DM4X]

If done correctly it shouldn't be seen as a bounce, as Google won't see any analytics code, and so won't be able to track such actions. If for some reason you showed legit visitors a html page with a javascript redirect to your affiliate link, and included analytics code on that page, then yes that could be tracked. But the way you're doing it it sounds like the user will go straight to the affiliate link via a server-side redirect.

However, cloaking based on useragent alone is certainly not water-tight. Though as it's your first time using cloaking, treat it as an experimen

Thanks mate, I was wondering if Chrome user could give bounce rate informations to google even if there is no gg analytics code on my site. This tracking code is not necessary for google to have data on user's behaviour (unfortunately).
I tweek my script and added more safety nets, user agent is not enough. Chatgpt created a nice script with reverse DNS added and JS cookie creation. Hope it will be enough

According to Google, cloaking like this is a direct violation of their spam policies. You can check the official guidelines below, focus on the "Cloaking" section. So yes, this kind of setup might work short term, but it’s not worth the risk if you are building a serious project.

https://developers.google.com/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies

I know it's against their TOS mate. Thanks

 

[ByteZer0]

Yeah, that kind of basic UA-based cloaking is super easy for Google to detect these days. They don’t just rely on user-agent but use real human reviewers, headless browsers, and can crawl from residential IPs. High bounce rate and no user engagement are also big red flags.

 

[Backlink Guru]

You're right to be cautious. Simple user-agent cloaking can still work short-term, but it's definitely easier for Google to detect nowadays, especially if there's a big difference in bounce rate or content between what bots and real users see. If you're not filtering by IP or ASN, it can raise flags quicker. That said, I’ve seen setups like this last for a few weeks to a couple of months depending on how aggressive the campaign is. Just don’t expect long-term rankings without mixing in some safer strategies or better cloaking logic

 

[Steptoe]

Thanks mate, I was wondering if Chrome user could give bounce rate informations to google even if there is no gg analytics code on my site. This tracking code is not necessary for google to have data on user's behaviour (unfortunately).

Yeah I always forget about Chrome data which Google assured us they didn't use, yet the recent redacted court documents show that they probably do. And that has reminded me to look into this subject some more...

 

[SEOPulse]

Implementing simple user-agent–based cloaking to show content only to Google bots and redirect users to affiliate links will it get caught quickly and hurt rankings, or fly under the radar long enough to profit?

 

[M4DM4X]

Thanks guys, I improved my script it is now based on:
user agent
reverse dns
js cookie
It's far from bullet proof but it's better.

And to avoid the high bounce rate I implemented a puzzle for visitors to solve before being redirected to the aff link.

 

[itsjinx]

If done correctly it shouldn't be seen as a bounce, as Google won't see any analytics code, and so won't be able to track such actions. If for some reason you showed legit visitors a html page with a javascript redirect to your affiliate link, and included analytics code on that page, then yes that could be tracked. But the way you're doing it it sounds like the user will go straight to the affiliate link via a server-side redirect.

However, cloaking based on useragent alone is certainly not water-tight. Though as it's your first time using cloaking, treat it as an experiment.

Incorrect. Any user who is using chrome will send data back to google.

 

["Deepak Sanghvi "]

Cloaking is explicitly against Google guidelines, so eventually it will get caught. The real question is just how long you get away with it.