Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Is Microsoft Crawling Google?

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thu Nov 11, 2004 02:36 PM
from the put-on-your-foil-hat dept.
triplecoil writes "Jason Dowdell over at WebProNews has written a piece questioning a tactic Microsoft might be using to beef up its new search engine. He thinks they might be dipping into Google's results to supplement its own. Dowdell likens it to leaving your garbage on the curb--anyone could conceivably go through it and take whatever is there for their own."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by garcia (6573) * on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:37PM (#10790801) Homepage
    Has anyone out there seen similar behavior on their own sites? Please comment with your qualitative/objective data if so.

    Sure, I see crawlers on my site all the time sometimes hitting the same URL over and over again. Do I understand their repetitive behavior? No. Do I care what they are doing? No, as long as they are obeying my robots.txt.

    I have complained before about MSNbot ignoring changes to robots.txt while Google happily changed its habbits (I can't find the link sorry). My recent fighting with Googlebot has come to a head when I had to disallow them access to my gallery completely because they refused to honor anything except Disallow: /. I had to go so far as to point Googlebot at my robots.txt and tell it to remove all the previous links. It was rather annoying dealing with support via email from Googlebot as they have apparently taken on the stance of "we don't care but you should put meta tags in all your files so that we don't index those pages." Umm, you are crawling MY site for YOUR profit, you do as I say, not the other way around.

    Do I care if MSNbot is crawling Google and then finding sites and links to search? No as it's none of OUR concern. What is OUR concern is our own robots.txt and how the spiders interact with our sites through that file. Let Google deal with Microsoft/MSNbot if that's what needs to be done but don't concern yourself with it otherwise.
    • "Google happily changed its habbits..."

      Google is Catholic?
    • by finkployd (12902) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:45PM (#10790921) Homepage
      Umm, you are crawling MY site for YOUR profit, you do as I say, not the other way around.

      No offense dude, but you are the one who put the site out their publically. Now if they are DoSing you then you have a valid complaint but robots.txt is just there as a friendly suggestion. I can write a search bot today that completely ignores it and there is nothing wrong with that (except perhaps ethically but even that is arguable) If you don't want people (or bots) viewing it then password protect it or take it off the public interweb.
      • Now if they are DoSing you then you have a valid complaint but robots.txt is just there as a friendly suggestion.

        Crawling a gallery of images (and all image property links as well) all day for several days might be considered "DoSing" I consider it being rude.

        You're right, they don't have to obey the robots.txt but they should when they say they will.
      • by mollymoo (202721) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:59PM (#10791111) Journal
        No offense dude, but you are the one who put the site out their publically. Now if they are DoSing you then you have a valid complaint but robots.txt is just there as a friendly suggestion.

        There's more to it than that. Google caches your pages and makes that cache of your copyright material available. Arguably if you have used your robots.txt file to tell it not to index (and therefore cache) your pages and it still does they are breaching copyright. OK, the Google cache is the world's largest breach of copyright anyway, but if you have told its spider not to index and it does regardless, that's a different ballgame.

        Putting it out there on the web does not give anyone the right to do with it as they please.

        • by liquidsin (398151) on Thursday November 11 2004, @03:13PM (#10791307) Homepage
          Hmmm...let's call "robots.txt" a "copyright control device" in that it states who may and may not have access to my copyrighted images directory. I'd bet a DMCA suit or two for circumventing your copyright control device would get them to pay attention...
        • by ad0gg (594412) on Thursday November 11 2004, @04:33PM (#10792199)
          If don't want your site indexed or cached by google. Go here and follow the directions.

          Remove yourself from google [google.com]

          "Note: If you believe your request is urgent and cannot wait until the next time Google crawls your site, use our automatic URL removal system. In order for this automated process to work, your webmaster must first insert the appropriate meta tags into the page's HTML code. "

          • by mollymoo (202721) on Thursday November 11 2004, @06:41PM (#10793597) Journal
            If don't want your site indexed or cached by google. Go here and follow the directions.

            I shouldn't need to go and fill out some form for every search engine to protect my rights. One accepted standard way to say "do not index this" should be sufficient. This is an automated system. There is an accepted automated method to stop crawlers indexing your site (robots.txt). If they (Google or anyone else) take your copyrighted content and reproduce it automatically when their automatic system could have automatically respected your explicitly stated and legally protected rights they are knowlingly making a flagrant copyright violation.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:37PM (#10790807)
    All Google has to do is run some unusual queries through MSN, check their logs, find the IP addresses and block them.
  • If so, they have legal remedies.

    If not, it's called doing business and gaining an advantage any legitimate way that you can.

    I think the interesting bit is in the conclusion. If MS is using this to establish a baseline, they can benchmark their spider against Google's over time.

    • Does it violate Google's Terms of Service? If so, they have legal remedies.
      If not, it's called doing business and gaining an advantage any legitimate way that you can.
      I think the interesting bit is in the conclusion. If MS is using this to establish a baseline, they can benchmark their spider against Google's over time.


      If I copy your work and take credit or it, does it violate your terms of service? If so, you have legal remedies. If not, it's called doing business and gaining an advantage any legitimat
    • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:58PM (#10791102) Homepage Journal
      Do Google's terms of service have any legal standing? Click-through EULAs don't in many jurisdictions, and I don't remember ever even seeing Google's ToS, let alone agreeing to them.
    • by nick13245 (681899) on Thursday November 11 2004, @03:22PM (#10791413)
      Yes it does.
      From Googles Privacy Center (http://www.google.com/terms_of_service.html):

      Personal Use Only

      The Google Services are made available for your personal, non-commercial use only. You may not use the Google Services to sell a product or service, or to increase traffic to your Web site for commercial reasons, such as advertising sales. You may not take the results from a Google search and reformat and display them, or mirror the Google home page or results pages on your Web site. You may not "meta-search" Google. If you want to make commercial use of the Google Services, you must enter into an agreement with Google to do so in advance. Please contact us for more information.
  • Yea, and (Score:5, Funny)

    by BrianGa (536442) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:38PM (#10790830)
    The new search engine's name will be Mooglesoft.
    • Re:Yea, and (Score:5, Funny)

      by MooseByte (751829) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:46PM (#10790927)

      "The new search engine's name will be Mooglesoft."

      Which will subsequently be sued by SCOogle, the latest startup from The Canopy Group, after announcing they purchased the rights to the Internet in a complex transaction which is documented in a briefcase somewhere in Germany.

  • by biffnix (174407) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:39PM (#10790840) Homepage Journal
    Couldn't Google just crawl Microsoft in return? Then they'd be stuck in an endless loop, and William Shatner can then swoop in, crack some skulls, and save the day.

    Or something like that.

    biffnix
  • by Shant3030 (414048) * on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:39PM (#10790842)
    Nah, never happens....
  • by mpost4 (115369) * on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:40PM (#10790852) Homepage Journal
    I can say that they been crawling like mad as of late, Google, Yahoo, and MSN. I say this because on my site I have had a lot of traffic from all three, and my site is not a popular, or even an important one but I seen a lot of traffic from them. Not just once a week or a few times a week but every day. There are big updates coming. I was not surprised to see the article about google doubling their index, I know something was coming from the way they are crawling unimportant/unpopular sites.
  • by bbzzdd (769894) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:40PM (#10790860)

    more evil than satan [msn.com]

    ROOFLES!

  • by Wrathie (668211) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:40PM (#10790863)
    Such trouble. Just buy the damned company.
  • by finkployd (12902) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:41PM (#10790869) Homepage
    Well, that kind of business practice would be completely out of character for Microsoft.

    This is a non-story. A good Slashdot headline will be when they get caught actually NOT doing something like this.

    Microsoft Has Original Idea and Implements it By Themselves
    From the 70%-of-slashdot-editors-suffered-heart-attacks -reading-this-submission Dept.
  • Meta-search? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by grasshoppa (657393) <skennedy@tp[ ]co.org ['no-' in gap]> on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:44PM (#10790904) Homepage
    The question is why? If they are doing this, are they simply going to present the results as their own, or are they going to work some magic and find the most relevant search results from ALL the engines and use those.

    In the first case, it's a slimy business practice. In the second, it's fairly cunning ( and has been tried before ).

    In either case, I doubt google is in any real danger. They are to search engines what MS is to the desktop. And while MS has squandered that advantage in the desktop arena ( reader homework: 250 word essay as to why ), google is only improving on their work.
  • Msn Crawling (Score:4, Informative)

    by clinko (232501) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:46PM (#10790936) Homepage Journal
    If you've been watching the logs to your site lately Microsoft has been RAPING most servers. Most crawlers will pick through pages with large lists 1 at a time, then come back every hour or so.

    MSN starting last week has been pulling EVERY LINK in sequence from my site. Even the larger Artist Index pages [clinko.com] of my site.

    Seriously, I've had this same spider on my site for about 36 hours now.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:46PM (#10790937)
    From Google's Terms of Service [google.com]
    Personal Use Only

    The Google Services are made available for your personal, non-commercial use only. You may not use the Google Services to sell a product or service, or to increase traffic to your Web site for commercial reasons, such as advertising sales. You may not take the results from a Google search and reformat and display them, or mirror the Google home page or results pages on your Web site. You may not "meta-search" Google. If you want to make commercial use of the Google Services, you must enter into an agreement with Google to do so in advance. Please contact us for more information.
  • Absurd (Score:5, Insightful)

    by targo (409974) <(targo_t) (at) (hotmail.com)> on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:50PM (#10790984) Homepage
    The claims are so absurd I don't even know where to start.
    1) His whole theory is based on the "fact" that the only way in the world to find his pages is to use site:www.sitename.com in Google, implying that Google has cached the results from an earlier crawl. Of course, there is no way that the Microsoft search couldn't have also cached it.
    2) Then, he claims that Microsoft is probably screen-scraping Google's results (for all the millions of sites out there), and using these results to recrawl those sites? This doesn't even make any sense.
    3) And last but not least, Microsoft is certainly basing its whole search architecture on the assumption that Google wouldn't ever notice MSN mirroring its whole index. Yeah right.
  • by G4from128k (686170) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:52PM (#10791014)
    It would be easy for Google to insert a small fraction of non-sequiturs in the results, look at Microsoft's search results, and then sue for misuse. Even if MSFT uses random proxies to avoid detection, it cannot manually recheck all the hits to make sure they are correct (if they could, they had the resources to check all the sites, then they not need to crawl Google. A few made-up sites or inappropriate search hits would be enough to establish a pattern of abuse.
  • by JustNiz (692889) on Thursday November 11 2004, @02:55PM (#10791052)
    You can't get to every page on the internet just by starting at one page and recursively following links, therefore the more places you from, the more likely you are to have 100% coverage.

    I could imagine that Microsoft just needs a few thousand URL's evenly-spread across the internet just to seed their crawler, which they can get from Google by using a list of most popular queries.

    Once their crawler has so many starting points it can do the rest itself.
  • Terrible article (Score:5, Insightful)

    by angio (33504) on Thursday November 11 2004, @03:02PM (#10791159) Homepage
    The author suggests that microsoft must be scraping google b/c the only place _he_ could find the URLs they're requesting was google's cache.

    Uh.

    Microsoft has been developing their internal search engine for quite a while now. Part of developing a search engine is using it to crawl and creating a large corpus of test data. It's hugely likely that M$ has had a working crawler system for much, much longer than would be indicated by their public announcement. Quite a few people who helped develop Altavista at HP/Compaq/DEC research joined Microsoft Research about two years ago - the kind of people who could write a high-performance crawler in their sleep and wake up feeling refreshed.

    That article seems like baseless, uninformed speculation, to put it not-so-politely.
  • by theluckyleper (758120) on Thursday November 11 2004, @03:02PM (#10791161) Homepage
    I'm certainly no Microsoft groupie, but this behavior may not be as sinister as it seems. Afterall, Google is on the internet, too. There are links found all over the internet to Google, with some specific search term embedded in the URL. If MSN's bot happened upon a link to a Google search page, is it somehow wrong for the MSN bot to follow that link, and spider as normal?
  • by potus98 (741836) on Thursday November 11 2004, @03:07PM (#10791233) Journal

    Hey Google, please don't make us read those wacky JPG/GIF letter scrambles with criss-cross lines and input the random characters into a field before submitting a search.

    "Hold on a sec while I Goog- Huh? Grrrr.... H... P... 7... O... wait no, 7... zero... ummm...

  • Full Circle (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Guppy06 (410832) on Thursday November 11 2004, @03:17PM (#10791354) Journal
    "Dowell likens it to leaving your garbage on the curb--anyone could conceivably go through it and take whatever is there for their own."

    It's interesting to know that Bill Gates has been forced to go back to his roots...
    The best way to prepare [to be a programmer] is to write programs, and to study great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and fished out listings of their operating system.
  • Arg I hate M$ (Score:4, Interesting)

    by OverlordQ (264228) on Thursday November 11 2004, @03:28PM (#10791503) Journal
    Yes this might sound like a rant, but somehow (partly my fault), the MSN Spider bot found one of my joke cgi scripts that translate pages to my own imaginary language. It's linked nowhere on my site, and maybe 3-4 places on the entire web. Said MSNBot began to pull PDF after PDF through the script, in addition to other large files, it also tried mailto: links. All in all said spider pulled about 1GB of data in a single day. My site's previous average was about maybe 300-400MB a Month. Let's just say that entire M$ IP Netblock was quickly filtered through iptables.
  • Highly unlikely (Score:4, Insightful)

    by David Leppik (158017) on Thursday November 11 2004, @03:28PM (#10791513) Homepage
    Google keeps track of IP addresses and blocks which are doing an unusually high number of searches and disables requests from them.

    How do I know? Because a friend of mine decided to find out how common all TLAs are (three-letter acronyms) by counting Google hits on each TLA. This was before the Google API, so he did it with good old fashioned HTTP/HTML. It didn't take long for Google to flag him as evil and block access from his IP block.

    Sure, Microsoft could find some way around this-- using different enough IP addresses to conceal the source-- but that's more trouble than it's worse. Worse yet, it sets up a cat-and-mouse game and keeps M$ dependent on Google-- when their stated goal is to beat Google at its own game.

    I've got a simpler explaination for what the author is seeing. His evidence is based on the fact that some pages being requested exist only in Google's cache. Well, spiders are supposed to do breadth-first searches so they don't hit the same site too often. Microsoft is probably going against data it collected a few weeks ago but hasn't put on its public servers yet. (Why not? Could be lots of things. Maybe they haven't put enough hardware on the front end to support the amount of data they have on the back end. Or maybe they're just slow.)

    As much as I'd like to bash M$, there's nothing here that really looks suspicious to me.
  • Not quite (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SamMichaels (213605) on Thursday November 11 2004, @03:36PM (#10791590)
    Dowell likens it to leaving your garbage on the curb--anyone could conceivably go through it and take whatever is there for their own.
    My garbage doesn't have a copyright statement, contain my patented technology, nor does it come with terms of service or licensing agreements.
  • by the-build-chicken (644253) on Thursday November 11 2004, @05:01PM (#10792533)

    microsoft is looking at old pages, google uses a cache...ergo microsoft must be using google.

    if we're going to use that kind of logic, I could just as easily come up with "afghanistan is in the middle east and supports terrorist, iraq is in the middle east...ergo, iraq must support terrorists", and use it to make a case for invading iraq...but you don't see......oh wait