Permanently Closed Marketplace Sales Thread

[Bailey Max]

Is it just me or is anyone else suddenly getting a lot of 401s from the 64 bit page authority checker?

Poor authority; so many for long pending requests...

 

[proxygo]

to sweet - funny

may 10th you activate s/box for me for first time in yrs
my windows install corrupted - requesting re-activation please
thought ide better wait 6 weeks b4 asking. ty

 

[loopline]

Is it just me or is anyone else suddenly getting a lot of 401s from the 64 bit page authority checker?

Just you.

Is your time in sync as that can cause a 401. Meaning make sure you time on your pc is synced to a world time server.

If thats good then how many moz accounts are you using? Try just 1 or try a new account. Do you get 401 for all requests or ?

to sweet - funny

may 10th you activate s/box for me for first time in yrs
my windows install corrupted - requesting re-activation please
thought ide better wait 6 weeks b4 asking. ty

Its an actual month, so it resets on the 1st of every month.

 

[TheSEOWizard]

Why you using free proxies? Especially on larger list? Even recheck/re-request authority site is available, your PIA wouldn't relieve a little.

Yes, free proxies are not reliable, there are so many people requesting, they tend to die easily. So the quality
can't compare with private proxies.
If you are really broke, that doesn't matter. Sell youself about 200~300$ here and there, it's very simple to
implement on public forums / craigslist / (internet). with little tricks, online stupid buyers are not hard to fish.
After cough up some U.S dollars, for god's sake, leave public proxies and subscribe Pro version. Otherwise, not only
you pain in there, but also the daily familiar requested source can't bear heavy user like you.(?)(Request-Response in and
out). Lot of errors shows that the requests are too frequent/quick and it's a signal lower the "free" requests.
Of cource you can continue "doing" this at home , nobody will blame you, cause they don't even know what
the hell is happening. The benefit is it doesn't cost anything.
How is about this?

I did not get the point here. I am mentioning a specific request not related the proxy type. I initially used the PA checker addon with my private proxies but Moz was banning my private proxies very quickly as I used to run large lists daily. So, I thought it would be better to use free proxies as Moz would not be able to catch up on me. So, even when I was using private proxies, the same problem was occurring where I had to face many error messages.

Sometimes, Moz just bans the free community accounts and I have several dozen accounts banned till date. In fact, my genuine free account which I use on my own computer is banned every few days and I need to create new Moz accounts. So, the problem with Moz remains irrespective of public, private or even without a proxy. Moz PA checking just keeps on failing at times and they also ban the free accounts very often. I use Moz a lot and so, can confirm the same. If there are errors and I need to check the same list of say 20000 urls all lists combined 2-3 times a day due to the error messages, it rings the bells at Moz and they start banning even more accounts.

No private proxy or direct connection without proxy can solve this situation. Even when I manually check at Moz OSE, there are errors. So, it is but natural for Moz to return errors through its API. Private proxies are not the solution to that. When I run a 20,000 list with Moz checker irrespective of the proxy type, it would return a lot of error messages. I randomize the APIs and check the lists again to remove the errors as much a possible. So, the best option is to implement a recheck error feature like in the PR checker if possible. That would remove a lot of the problems in the addons dependent on Moz APIs.

 

[nipester]

Just you.

Is your time in sync as that can cause a 401. Meaning make sure you time on your pc is synced to a world time server.

If thats good then how many moz accounts are you using? Try just 1 or try a new account. Do you get 401 for all requests or ?



Its an actual month, so it resets on the 1st of every month.

I had previously made a new account on which the OSE was working but after plugging in the API key into scrapebox I got the 401 error yet again. However, I just now synched my VPS clock to an ntp server and it changed the time by I think exactly one hour and suddenly 20 API keys began to work again so it did have something to do with time synchronization it seems.

 

[proxygo]

so mat, does that mean i need to wait from may 10th>july 1st
if im reading correctly. thats 51days not 30

 

[Sweetfunny]

So, the best option is to implement a recheck error feature like in the PR checker if possible. That would remove a lot of the problems in the addons dependent on Moz APIs.

I've made a note of this feature request.

I had previously made a new account on which the OSE was working but after plugging in the API key into scrapebox I got the 401 error yet again. However, I just now synched my VPS clock to an ntp server and it changed the time by I think exactly one hour and suddenly 20 API keys began to work again so it did have something to do with time synchronization it seems.

Yes if your machines clock is out Moz can throw errors because their API has a time value.

so mat, does that mean i need to wait from may 10th>july 1st
if im reading correctly. thats 51days not 30

No Mat was saying completely the opposite, you said you waited 6 weeks and he indicated you don't need to.

ScrapeBox Mobile Tester Addon v2.0.0.0 Released

Google has pushed out search engine algorithm updates designed to scores webpages compatibility with mobile devices, and favor mobile friendly sites in mobile search results. So we have created a Mobile Site Tester addon to help automate the testing of a large number of pages without the need to tirelessly enter your URL?s one by one in the Google Site Tester.

This addon reports the Pass or Fail status, and it also lists the total scores for each URL as well as lists the individual attributes that make a site mobile friendly or not and their individual scores. The mobile attributes are:

• Text too small to read
• Links too close together
• Mobile view-port not set
• Content wider than screen
• Uses incompatible plugins

Ideally you want your overall score to be 100% and the scores for the 5 individual attributes to be zero. With the Mobile Site Tester addon you are able to easily see how negatively each aspect is effecting your mobile score which Google?s web interface does not display.

This addon is available in ScrapeBox v2.0 from the Addons menu.

 

[TheSEOWizard]

I've made a note of this feature request.

Thank you Sweetfunny for being an awesome support and responsive to new ideas and suggestions as always. Love and appreciate all your efforts.

And thank you for mobile checker addons. Awesome job as always.

 

[proxygo]

oh ok sorry sweet miss understood my bad, i had to re install SB
on may 10th due to hard drive failed.. but my windows install got badly
messed up , so after installing all my stuff on the 10th, on the 11th had
to do it all again, ugh. anyways sent a request via support, details are
well, only things real is my user name proxy-go-bhw and incase anyone
trys , my ip never changes, static. uk.

 

[Bailey Max]

Show me some Russian adult keywords/url etc.

Do you want to build backlinks/post comments or for affiliate purpose, if I guess correctly? I have huge russia/russian/Russian/Russia adult website/url keyword list. But only in English.
You are totally free to add your stuff in there. Wait a moment.

 

[softtouch2009]

Show me some Russian adult keywords/url etc.

Do you want to build backlinks/post comments or for affiliate purpose, if I guess correctly? I have huge russia/russian/Russian/Russia adult website/url keyword list. But only in English.
You are totally free to add your stuff in there. Wait a moment.

This thread is not for exchanging url lists, do that somewhere else.

 

[spiritfly]

My host received a complaint today from Webiron telling them that my server is doing some botnet activity which seems like spam. I quickly checked the links that the complaints and they were all from the same destination domain which is a yourls script website. I have only Scrapebox and GSA SER on that server and I know it isn't GSA SER that leaked my IP because I use only private proxies on it and the URLs in the complaint were not built by GSA SER. They were all raw URLs that were scraped through scrapebox. I use two instances of scrapebox with public proxies (only anon and elite). I'm wondering how did the server IP leak to that same website so many times, but the only thing to could do that are those public proxies.

So my question is, how does scrapebox exactly scrape the URLs from Google or Bing? I know it does a search on Google/Bing for the footprint/kw combination, google/bing loads the search results, but does scrapebox actually open any URLs from the search results list? Does it visit them before writing them down to the harvested URLs list or at any point during the harvesting process for that matter?

 

[loopline]

My host received a complaint today from Webiron telling them that my server is doing some botnet activity which seems like spam. I quickly checked the links that the complaints and they were all from the same destination domain which is a yourls script website. I have only Scrapebox and GSA SER on that server and I know it isn't GSA SER that leaked my IP because I use only private proxies on it and the URLs in the complaint were not built by GSA SER. They were all raw URLs that were scraped through scrapebox. I use two instances of scrapebox with public proxies (only anon and elite). I'm wondering how did the server IP leak to that same website so many times, but the only thing to could do that are those public proxies.

So my question is, how does scrapebox exactly scrape the URLs from Google or Bing? I know it does a search on Google/Bing for the footprint/kw combination, google/bing loads the search results, but does scrapebox actually open any URLs from the search results list? Does it visit them before writing them down to the harvested URLs list or at any point during the harvesting process for that matter?

No, scrapebox does not visit urls when scraping from the search engines. So it doesn't come from Scrapebox, unless you were running some addon like alive checker, or page scanner etc... without quality proxies.

I am bit confused by your post though, you said the urls were not built by gsa, but then you talked about scraping. Was the complaint from building links or just from loading pages? I can say that in either gsa or scrapebox if you forget to check the use proxies box for something then its not using proxies, and bear in mind a public proxy can switch and reveal your ip at any time, which is generally not an issue for search engines, but if your posting links with public proxies its not a good thing.

 

[spiritfly]

No, scrapebox does not visit urls when scraping from the search engines. So it doesn't come from Scrapebox, unless you were running some addon like alive checker, or page scanner etc... without quality proxies.

I am bit confused by your post though, you said the urls were not built by gsa, but then you talked about scraping. Was the complaint from building links or just from loading pages? I can say that in either gsa or scrapebox if you forget to check the use proxies box for something then its not using proxies, and bear in mind a public proxy can switch and reveal your ip at any time, which is generally not an issue for search engines, but if your posting links with public proxies its not a good thing.

Thanks for clarifying that Matt. So I can safely rule out scrapebox now and turn to GSA SER as they are the only tools running on my server. I haven't forgotten to use proxies on any tool, I can confirm that as well.

Here is the actual complaint:

Unwanted and or Abusive Web Requests:
Offending IP: [[MY SERVER IP]]
- Issue: Source has attempted the following botnet activity: URL redirection SPAM link checker
- Block Type: New Ban
- Time: 2015-06-18 03:32:12-07:00
- Port: 80
- Service: http
- Targeted Range: 96.47.225.0/24
- Targeted URL: http://[Site Host Removed For Privacy]/4rxcom11033
- User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:34.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/34.0

I have about 10 of these complaints which are all the same except for the Targeted URL part (4rxcom11033) which changes. By googling all those parts I quickly concluded that all of the targeted URLs from every complaint belong to the same URL shortener script site which uses the yourls script, urlii(dot)me .

But all of the shortened URLs from that site that are being reported as "Targeted URL" field are not built by me. I checked my GSA SER verified links and I have only built 4 shortened URLs to that URL shortener with GSA SER, but none of them match with those reported as Targeted URL. On the other hand I have found that one of the targeted URLs can be found in my scraped lists with scrapebox. They were all probably scraped with scrapebox, but I have set an automatic duplicate domain removal to that folder so only one of them survived.

So if scrapebox doesn't visit them and GSA SER doesn't visit the raw URLs that are being feed into SER, how were all of these links visited by my server bypassing any proxy? This is the mystery that I cannot solve today.

By the way, not complaining or anything of course, just asking for some help by professionals such as Matt. Matt if you don't feel this is should be discussed here, can you reply to me in PM please? Thanks!

EDIT: Just noticed that scrapebox uses a different useragent than the one in the complaint so I can definitely rule out Scrapebox now.

 

[TheSEOWizard]

Did you post/spam those links to the other websites? If you did not post those links, then how is there any spam complaint. Visiting any website is not a crime be it through bots or without it. I also use both SB and GSA and so, would like to know that same. However, I never use SB for any bulk spamming nowadays and only use the whitehat parts of the tools such as the addons and other features.

 

[spiritfly]

Did you post/spam those links to the other websites? If you did not post those links, then how is there any spam complaint. Visiting any website is not a crime be it through bots or without it. I also use both SB and GSA and so, would like to know that same. However, I never use SB for any bulk spamming nowadays and only use the whitehat parts of the tools such as the addons and other features.

Exactly my thoughts! I haven't posted those URLs on that website, that I'm absolutely positive. I checked what those links are about and I have no such campaigns in my SER. I found one of them in the scraped links though, so they came from my harvesting sessions as they are.

But I'm still not sure how my server managed to visit them all without proxy in such a short period of time. Since they aren't posted by me, the only theory that comes to my mind is they were somehow processed for identification in SER, although I feed SER with already identified links. I unchecked the "Skip for identification" option in SER so it will use the proxies for identifying from now on just to be on the safe side.

Btw I only use SB for harvesting. No posting has been done with SB or any other tool for that matter except SER which it did not create those links.

EDIT: The complaint came from webiron.com . Just checked their website and company and they seem like they are just either starting out or have no reputation at all. I was going to contact them about this, but then I figured they might be using this as a tactic to gather info. Has anyone heard about them?

 

[TheSEOWizard]

All you need are 1 premium IP +At Home+ Some Food (free?) That's all!

Dude are you a troll since birth or have you learned trolling recently and practicing the same on BHW? I see that you have joined just days and have made 5 troll posts with nothing useful to contribute to BHW or other members. If trolling is the only thing you have joined BHW for then you are doing it perfectly well. If not, you need to get a life. None of your posts even make sense and you are randomly quoting my posts without any referring and just adding some pure BS. Go out and learn SEO before trying to post on BHW. I see two troll profiles in this thread since the last few days and this is just a courteous reply before I report both the troll profiles to the BHW mods.

 

[loopline]

Thanks for clarifying that Matt. So I can safely rule out scrapebox now and turn to GSA SER as they are the only tools running on my server. I haven't forgotten to use proxies on any tool, I can confirm that as well.

Here is the actual complaint:

Unwanted and or Abusive Web Requests:
Offending IP: [[MY SERVER IP]]
- Issue: Source has attempted the following botnet activity: URL redirection SPAM link checker
- Block Type: New Ban
- Time: 2015-06-18 03:32:12-07:00
- Port: 80
- Service: http
- Targeted Range: 96.47.225.0/24
- Targeted URL: http://[Site Host Removed For Privacy]/4rxcom11033
- User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:34.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/34.0

I have about 10 of these complaints which are all the same except for the Targeted URL part (4rxcom11033) which changes. By googling all those parts I quickly concluded that all of the targeted URLs from every complaint belong to the same URL shortener script site which uses the yourls script, urlii(dot)me .

But all of the shortened URLs from that site that are being reported as "Targeted URL" field are not built by me. I checked my GSA SER verified links and I have only built 4 shortened URLs to that URL shortener with GSA SER, but none of them match with those reported as Targeted URL. On the other hand I have found that one of the targeted URLs can be found in my scraped lists with scrapebox. They were all probably scraped with scrapebox, but I have set an automatic duplicate domain removal to that folder so only one of them survived.

So if scrapebox doesn't visit them and GSA SER doesn't visit the raw URLs that are being feed into SER, how were all of these links visited by my server bypassing any proxy? This is the mystery that I cannot solve today.

By the way, not complaining or anything of course, just asking for some help by professionals such as Matt. Matt if you don't feel this is should be discussed here, can you reply to me in PM please? Thanks!

EDIT: Just noticed that scrapebox uses a different useragent than the one in the complaint so I can definitely rule out Scrapebox now.

Exactly my thoughts! I haven't posted those URLs on that website, that I'm absolutely positive. I checked what those links are about and I have no such campaigns in my SER. I found one of them in the scraped links though, so they came from my harvesting sessions as they are.

But I'm still not sure how my server managed to visit them all without proxy in such a short period of time. Since they aren't posted by me, the only theory that comes to my mind is they were somehow processed for identification in SER, although I feed SER with already identified links. I unchecked the "Skip for identification" option in SER so it will use the proxies for identifying from now on just to be on the safe side.

Btw I only use SB for harvesting. No posting has been done with SB or any other tool for that matter except SER which it did not create those links.

EDIT: The complaint came from webiron.com . Just checked their website and company and they seem like they are just either starting out or have no reputation at all. I was going to contact them about this, but then I figured they might be using this as a tactic to gather info. Has anyone heard about them?

The skip for identification was most likely the culprit. I mean SER does visit all urls that it is fed. I actually have found that SER works "better" (faster) if you leave that unchecked (which seems backwards), but if its checked then its using your ip to hammer away on all urls.

Is this from your ISP or from your server company? I mean did the complaint come to your ip or you server?

If its your IP you can play the unsecured wifi card, or malware or whatever.

If its your server company, don't sweat it, keep moving, you can always just ask them to change your IP or worst case switch to a new company. I can say I have not ever received such a complaint on any server and I run GSA and Scrapebox on a LOT of servers 24.7

But I did run Xrumer wide open for a few months on a server and they eventually told me that they were going to cancel it, so complains are possible of course but server companies are a dime a dozen. It also may take up some of their time, but as long as they say they cancelled the customer it doesn't hurt them.

 

[Deleted member 198715]

Your transaction ID for this payment is: 1UW18152LS601961V.

 

[satyr85]

Its hard to make large harvests with Scrapebox...

I started yesterday 4 instances of Scrapebox, each instance 1k threads, each instance 8k urls per second.
After ~5 hours in harvester session folder i had 4 files, 20gb each, 80gb in total. This give 380gb results per day, to finish harvesting i need 5 days so 1.9TB space needed... but hdd have only 1TB.


Problem:
No option in SB to split results when harvesting in multiple files.


How to fix problem:
Add option in SB to create new file if actual file with results have more lines than X. Gscraper already have this function and im really missing this function in SB.

With above we can use external program (for example GSA PI) to remove duplicates while harvesting. Right now its not possible because GSA PI cannot acces txt file when SB is writing results to this file.