88 comments

[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 160 ms ] thread
Seems like they could easily fix this with robots.txt or something similar, I really doubt it's oversight on their part either.

Any ideas why they're doing this?

I assume that some site has hostgator-related links with two slashes instead of one. Due to the two slashes, the GoogleBot doesn't realize that it's indexing their own results pages.
They probably want to index some pages on google.com, but not search results. To exclude search results, someone wrote something to exclude URLs that start with /search, and forgot that //search works the same way.
They disallow /search

    User-agent: *
    Disallow: /search
but maybe //search slipped thorough?
This is just a bug, sorry.
All of the results are HostGator coupons, anyone else seeing the same?
Yes. Look at the query:

    search?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com 
    %2F%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dproranktracker.com%2B%2B 
    %2BHostgator%2BCoupon%2BCode%3ACOUPON333&pws=0& 
    hl=en#pws=0&hl=en&q=site:http:%2F%2Fwww.google.com 
    %2F%2Fsearch
Even if you take the search string site:http://www.google.com//search and put it into a fresh Google search, it only returns HostGator coupons. Maybe someone from Google can explain it.
Ah, I didn't notice! Interesting.
It is obviously the most relevant content on this site. PageRank is always right.
A better example url is https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.goog...

Note that switching //search to /search eliminates the phenomenon.

Note too that all the results on page 1 and page 10 are related to hostgator and coupon codes. I expect that there is some site which contains some text or links that cause these results.

Note also that the `site:` search operator isn't supposed to include anything but a domain or subdomain: no http:// nor /search should be included.

Finally, note that the results are actually google search pages, though! So I do think this is some kind of bug.

But NOT an instance of Google indexing its result pages. Please change the title to 'This one weird google bug will make you scratch your head!' :)

Edit: andybalholm suggests (on this page) that the double slash is in fact causing the googlebot to visit those search results page and indeed index them. Hm, sounds true.

Has anybody visited the spamfodder pages and found instances of malformed yet operative links to google search? (I don't feel like visiting those sites on this machine on this network.)

>This one weird google bug will make you scratch your head!

But that's clickbait! :)

>But NOT an instance of Google indexing its result pages.

That's what it looks like to me. Could you explain the difference?

I changed my tune at some point via seeing comments here. I posted a comment to that effect.

In hindsight, your comment alone would have changed my tune: nope, I can't explain the difference between a page appearing in search results and a page being indexed. Thanks for the illumination. :)

>Note also that the `site:` search operator isn't supposed to include anything but a domain or subdomain: no http:// nor /search should be included.

google recommends the site:example.com/path shortcut itself https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35256?hl=en

and it's ok to use, as site:example.com inurl:path could mean example.com/hudriwudri/path, too

It works with

  site:http://www.google.com/search
, but all the results are considered duplicates and omitted. Hit the button.
Nice! These results must represent all the hrefs people have posted that point to google search...
Google's robots.txt http://www.google.com/robots.txt disallows /search but not //search.

However, if you search site:http://www.google.com/search and show omitted search results, you get a bunch of results (all 404s).

If you do this there are some strange results on the last couple pages.

For example: Obama won't salute the flag | Phallectomy | horse+mating+video | feral+horses+induced+abortion | Lactating+dog+images | animal+mating+video | mating+mpg+-beastiality+-...

So, Half Life 3 confirmed.

Does nobody here understand robots.txt? It's pretty easy to figure out what's going on if you do. I assumed most users here work with web technologies, but maybe the readership doesn't skew that way as much as I thought.
Now google will index searches of its own searches.
I think it might not be that they "index themselves" but they index links to google that others post on forums, it's common for people to link to "lmgtfy" so they probably index those links too. I don't see google "googling" on itself while indexing it's own searches. Unless Skynet.
Googleception! (sorry for the useless comment, but I had to)
Fun. I expect a cheeky onebox to come out of this at some point along the lines of the recursion search.
I wonder if it's somehow possible to exploit this to pass pagerank from google.com to your own website. Or if there's even people already doing it.
Well, let's look at the results - coupons, watches, ... - yup some blackhat SEO is probably cursing whoever publicised this issue.
Can someone nuke the link on this post. It's clearly click bate and we're just driving traffic into it. :(
You should mention the arbitrary data in the query section, its not visible at the first look.
That's an artifact of google's weird link stuffing, if you search 'site:http://www.google.com//search' by hand it still works
Perhaps this "works" because all the pagerank stuff has been altered by all the sudden traffic related to hostgator coupons.
The goal is to have an explicit Google search result which expresses the equivalent of "this Google search cannot be found via Google".

This will help construct a proof of Göogdel's Incompleteness Theorem.

Without being able to find anything in Google, including Google searches, and including that search for Google searches itself, Google is not a completely powerful search engine; however, it cannot be complete and consistent at the same time. There are searches which cannot be shown to be conclusively either in the index, or not in the index.

(comment deleted)
why the hack google ever made it possible to hit the search url with more than one slash there...
It's interesting if add a slash to this page the result will be different.

https://news.ycombinator.com//item?id=8297241

Where in all other cases tested it won't

Is this a server specific stuff? Or it's configurable

http://url.spec.whatwg.org//#concept-url-path http://www.nytimes.com///pages//politics//index.html http://www.bing.com////search?q=site%3Abing.com%2Fsearch%3Fq... https://www.cloudflare.com///index

Many frameworks allow you to route URLs to actions instead of mapping to a file. I just tested it in one of my Symfony projects, and I was able to route /login and //login to two separate controllers.

Furthermore, it's pretty common to rewrite URLs, doing things like adding/removing trailing slashes, whatever. So it wouldn't be too difficult to have it condense multiple slashes into just one.

For example, this link worksfine: google.com//////////////////////////////////search?q=foobar

Google search tries to cover a lot of typos or be pretty user-friendly for people who don't understand tech. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a grandma out there who thinks http://google.com//search is the correct method.

Tested with a jetty + spring 3 with close to ootb settings, more than one slash will resolve not found error.
But does it index the results of the search of the index?