Making search more secure: Accessing search query data in Google Analytics
Tuesday, October 18, 2011 | 11:17 AM
Labels: Announcements, googlenew
As search becomes an increasingly customized experience, particularly for signed in users, we believe that protecting these personalized search results is important. As part of that effort, today the Google Search team announced that SSL Search on https://www.google.com will become the default experience for signed in users on Google.com (see the Official Google Blog post to learn more). Protecting user privacy is important to us, and we want to take this opportunity to explain what the Google Analytics team is doing to help you continue measuring your website effectively in light of these changes.
How will this change impact Google Analytics users?
When a signed in user visits your site from an organic Google search, all web analytics services, including Google Analytics, will continue to recognize the visit as Google “organic” search, but will no longer report the query terms that the user searched on to reach your site. Keep in mind that the change will affect only a minority of your traffic. You will continue to see aggregate query data with no change, including visits from users who aren’t signed in and visits from Google “cpc”.
What is Google Analytics doing about it?
We are still measuring all SEO traffic. You will still be able to see your conversion rates, segmentations, and more.
To help you better identify the signed in user organic search visits, we created the token “(not provided)” within Organic Search Traffic Keyword reporting. You will continue to see referrals without any change; only the queries for signed in user visits will be affected. Note that “cpc” paid search data is not affected.
Our team continues to explore ways that we can surface relevant information, like search query data, to help you measure the effectiveness of your website and marketing efforts, and as always, we welcome any feedback or comments that you have. Thank you for continuing to help us improve Google Analytics.
186 comments:
ADN said...
Where's the -1 button?
11:40 AM
Sara Mazur said...
Will we be able to access logged in organic search queries through Google Analytics Premium?
11:41 AM
admin said...
It's a big, big BS...we are getting summary of those searches, and we can't see the "personal data" and searches done by a certain user...
11:43 AM
mike solar said...
analytics, what a tool - when used in conjunction with webmasters tools. Google alerts keeps you intouch with market. ;)
11:46 AM
Martin Aberastegue said...
This really sucks, I'm sure you will be providing this on the premium version. And why this only affects to organic and not paid search too? This is BS....
11:52 AM
Edward Domain said...
This makes zero sense. Thanks for making all our lives harder
11:54 AM
claye said...
12:02 PM
Miguel de TallerSEO said...
How is expected to help this change deleting info about an important segment as Google validated users ?
With >40M users on Google+, is this a 'minority of our traffic'?
Who decided to take this decision when in Spain Google has 96% market share?
I can't understand how this is going to help me as validated user and as web analyst. I can't...
12:03 PM
Miguel de TallerSEO said...
Claye, it's not a Google Analytics change, it's a Google Search info deletion afecting ALL analytics tools.
I think Avinash will not be happy with this decision, and I can't understand why this...
12:09 PM
DemandResults said...
12:12 PM
Claye Stokes said...
Showing search queries for CPC suggests that you're not really interested in making search more secure, as the title is trying to spin it.
What gives?
12:19 PM
Anonymous said...
And how is this a security feature? That same SSL connection is obviously working fine for non-Google users and PPC hits, so there is no technical barrier. So really it's not the SSL security that changed; it's that Google's "protecting" Google users from GA users. Aka, us.
12:23 PM
esejoker468 said...
12:32 PM
Nina hale said...
Ooooohhh, I don't see how this compromises PII. But it does diminish the ability to understand what is creating meaning experiences for visitors.
Why not block information about personalized results and allow more keyword data so we can create sites that better engage with customers?
12:35 PM
Chris said...
Is this an April Fools joke? You have to be kidding.
12:38 PM
pittfall said...
FAIL
Analytics data is already private... I don't see "John Doe" searched for this keyword in my reporting.
If Google wants webmasters and marketers to be able to improve their websites for visitors, then this data would remain as is. This is imparative to providing the best landing page and experience. Example: if Google determined that a single page ranked for two keywords and one has a better experience for keyword 1 but not for keyword 2 then a webmaster would work to build a better page for keyword 2, however, if the data is split in half or more people using keyword 2 are signed into their Google account, you wouldn't be able to provide a positive experience.
Who is looking out for the visitors?
12:46 PM
Matt Mikulla said...
So lame. Bad move Google.
12:47 PM
Stuart Wooster said...
Terrible idea. What has the team been smoking?
12:53 PM
Ramenos said...
This makes no sense. It should be an option for each user... How can we do analytics and SEO if you start deleting keywords people are using....
1:01 PM
SEOAustralia said...
Bing is the Answer
1:01 PM
Antoine said...
@all analysts : Just switch other vendors ;)
@all internet users : just switch to Bing
1:24 PM
9dbe4f90-f9c9-11e0-b8f8-000bcdcb5194 said...
this is dumb.
1:41 PM
O.N.E. said...
Agree with 99% of the people on this comment thread. This is beyond ridiculous. I don't understand how this is making things more "secure". As someone mentioned, I can't see exactly who the person is or their IP of the search anyway! Omniture may do this, I have no idea, but to make the crux of useful Google data in analytics unavailable? Why not just block the user data rather than the search term? I would rather know HOW people got to my site rather than the "who" anyway. And pardon my naivete what can one do with data on how people get to my site anyway? Besides help their own site? I really don't understand what makes someone vulnerable through search queries. God forbid this help people with their businesses in a trouble economy.
Oh and the % of users signed in is significantly higher than reported, I'm pretty sure...if you're signed into gmail or Google + you are signed in to Google search as a default.
More and more I'm becoming a Bing fan. Search results are getting better there, better than Google in some cases, and less BS associated with these changes that are doing NOTHING but ruining small business owners' lives.
1:50 PM
Doc Campbell said...
It seems as though Google has undergone a major shift in its business philosophy. Apparently, user experience is no longer one of their goals.
I would hope that someone is monitoring the impact of this boneheaded decision to your bottom line, Larry... I suspect you'll be seeing some downward trends showing up very shortly.
1:56 PM
Jordan said...
I'll be boycotting Google for all my personal searches until they reverse this policy.
1:59 PM
Torka said...
I agree with the majority. This is a bad move. It doesn't do anything to enhance privacy or security for the searchers, and simply makes it harder for us to improve our sites. I'm not a happy camper. Evil Google.
2:03 PM
JT said...
I don't know how analytics providers are expected to be able to identify the referral as having come from Google (even without the query) - from what I can see in my fairly limited tests, the referrer actually gets completely removed by Google's https URL forwarder, so there's absolutely no way of telling where the page view has come from at all. Not cool, Google, not cool.
2:15 PM
harvestnutrition said...
I'm gravely disappointed in this change. You could simply shield user data such as IP without hiding the keyword query. I try to tweak my website to focus on what the user in my market wants, so they'll have the best experience. This is going to leave me with too many blindspots.
And the double standard of still passing PPC query data? Come on, Big G...we're not that gullible. As a marketing professional that consults with various reputable ecommerce companies that benefit Google in more ways than one, I am beyond disappointed. This makes no sense. Please reconsider.
2:39 PM
Rob said...
I'm very disappointed. Why Google wants to hide data? The user experience is now the second most important factor.
2:52 PM
DisgruntledGoat said...
Gotta agree, this is a total BS move. I know it's not the fault of the Google Analytics team but this really makes no sense. I doubt it's just a "minority" of traffic if it's every logged in user. Odd that you haven't mentioned any numbers for logged-in vs not-logged-in queries...
And how does knowing the query that sent the user to my site breach any kind of privacy? I mean, I could find the IP address of every visitor myself from my log files if I wanted, that's certainly "less secure" than any Google search query.
2:53 PM
Jolly Joel said...
This is quite clearly a breach of Google's own first rule: Do no evil.
To allow advertisers to access the same data that Google is blocking from analytics users is unnecessarily crippling a product in the false name of privacy.
FAIL
3:11 PM
wanker said...
Bad move. If I use something else for analytics I can of course get this data still, right? Which means I just might do that.
Don't be evil? How about don't be stupid.
3:32 PM
Daniela said...
Seriously? PPC yes but organic not? This is stepping back with Analytics :S
3:37 PM
Chris G said...
While I understand the motivation behind making Google.com the https version it would have been nice if some prior consideration had been placed on how to integrate it with GA.
This is going to make many webmasters jobs much harder.
4:46 PM
Mike said...
If you search for crack on Google, you get the Google Analytics Team. Ridiculous.
5:10 PM
jlbraaten said...
Why not cut out City, State, and Browser Version & OS while you're at it?
Jolly Joel said it best. If you're shutting off keywords for organic, do it for paid too. Otherwise you appear to be very evil and a hypocrite.
It's still a privacy win if you keep the SSL for all users while giving back our organic keywords in GA. Please?
5:47 PM
Reprise Media AUS said...
9:24 PM
ron said...
10:00 PM
borntrouble said...
This is wrong. Removing sucha na important feature is never expected from GA. The blog says it will affect a very minority of our traffic but I guess there are a lot of users who remain signed into at least a single google service all the time and if they open up a new tab in the browser and try searching something and click the organic listing, the keywords will not be tracked as they will still be logged into google. Google seriously needs to reconsider this.
10:37 PM
Even Before said...
So Due to this Implementation,I May lose search engine friendly keywords of my site. Really Tough B'Coz 60% of users Do Google search With signed in of their Google Accounts.
11:04 PM
MF said...
I continue to be amazed at how much disregard Google exhibits towards the very advertisers who rely on their services to drive relevant experiences and justify spending money on Google. Their arrogant approach towards those using their advertising services has been shown time and again through their the lack of well-thought-out tracking mechanisms across a variety of new products. Now, we’re beholden to reports that are generated by Google with no effective means of understanding their accuracy.
Instead, as the signed in population grows, sites will need to engage in – wait for it – paid search – to obtain this meaningful data!
This change severely hinders sites that were using this referring data to drive more relevant experiences for Google searchers. For example, we look at referring query data to understand what products a user is most likely to convert on, and when we later create a page targeted toward that referring term (if it hits a volume threshold) we merchandise the page using the products users coming from that query have demonstrated an interest in. We can’t drive that relevant experience without knowing what the user searched for.
In this case, Google could have relatively easily solved for this issue in advance by allowing webmasters to enable a custom name-value pair for referring keyword via WMT. Users could disable this in their preferences. When the name-value pair is enabled, Google could then direct users to a version of any given SERP URL that has that name-value pair appended. For example, instead of directing users to www.windowshades.com Google could send them to www.windowshades.com/?refkwd=roman%20shades . That would have enabled tracking in an easy manner, driven a relevant experience, and still allowed users the ability to “opt out” of referring query info.
12:08 AM
albacete said...
so? is there any indicator of "google logged users"?? or do I take all the query-non-provided as logged?
I think is a mess.
One question, data from GWT integrated in GA still show query info?
thanks
12:57 AM
kamonama said...
> Note that “cpc” paid search data is not affected.
I think you are evil...
1:04 AM
kimson said...
Don't be evil – remember?
It makes no sense whatsoever.
Now come on, what's the real reason behind it?
1:21 AM
Found SEO said...
be useful to see the percentage of logged in users, will most probably change per industry. And in those industries with a higher percentage of signed in users, then obtaining Google +1's will be even more important in those sectors.
1:31 AM
The Optimizers Ltd said...
If SEO's were all suddenly to drop Google and start preaching and evangelising Bing instead, it would have a massive impact on market share. Perhaps Google should consider this before continuously pushing SEO's further and further into such activism.
1:38 AM
N said...
It's not really a Google decision - it's the HTTPS spec which says if you follow a link from HTTPS to HTTP then the client shouldn't include the referrer.
1:39 AM
Recetarios.net said...
Who have had the great idea?
This is a big step backwards for the industry and particularly web analysts and SEOs. It is really ridiculous. Surely Avinash wouldn't approve it.
1:47 AM
EZ100 said...
i think that you should also cut the ppc from the data or not do anything. if you care about users so much.
2:01 AM
BingBing said...
So users should create a google account in order to have his/hers privacy protected. Mmm, this seems to me the commercial reason. So more Google services such as +1 can be offered to a larger group. Well I hope this is the end of Google who is offering worse search result after all their updates. I find myself using BING more and more these days. i sincerely hope other will do too soon!
2:53 AM
cotsweb said...
@N That still doesn't explain why this change applies to organic but not PPC, surely both are using SSL?
2:59 AM
gary analizzatore said...
This is ridiculous...
3:14 AM
Cricket Equipment Specialist said...
3:41 AM
SOZO Design said...
“Keep in mind that the change will affect only a minority of your traffic.” - No it won’t, Google are trying to get more and more people to use Google+ which requires sign-in, so either Google+ flops and fails or it succeeds and consequently more and more Analytics keyword data becomes hidden.
3:42 AM
kavin hill said...
we are getting summary of those searches, and we can't see the "personal data" and searches done by a certain user.
Car movers chandigarh.
3:50 AM
majorddf said...
£50 quid says a paid-to-use analytics option is in the works...where we get our data back.
Its the only logical explanation as the reasoning provided just does not stack up.
3:50 AM
Arnout said...
Think about the number of google accounts and the number of signed in people this represents:
- Android owners
- Gmail
- Youtube
- Google apps
- Blogger
- +1 users
- etc
- etc
This is massive, I'm just wondering why and if they will include the original search term in the cpc results, I guess not...
Google has for sure made a move to the 'evil' side...
Hope they will reconsider.
3:58 AM
julianmoskov said...
Natural search keyword data is extremely important, not least to help and inform PPC decisions. This really would be a strange move by Google.
4:16 AM
Neil Grainger said...
PPC urls are tagged with keyword data, hence the reason they will still work. Still seems like an ill thought out decision considering this has been in the works for over a year. I suppose Google could dynamically tag all natural search links to provide the keyword details, but we'll see.
4:38 AM
Magnus Strømnes Bøe said...
This will force me to look for other solutions than Google Analytics to measure keyword traffic.
I really do not see why this change has been done.
As long as I can not see which user is logged in there is no sense in hiding keyword data.
Bad move.
4:47 AM
No Pork Pies said...
Does this mean Google's going to stop collecting this data as well? I doubt that.
My work around - let me know if you think it will work!
The current URL string has the keyword within the query string of 'q=' for instance:
https://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=no+pork+pies....
so in this case the keyword 'q=' is no+pork+pies or 'no pork pies'
If the URL is passed across in the server log files as the referral string then we need to export the log files filter our anything that contains 'https://www.google.com' identify anything after 'q=' and there is your keyword list.
The issue being that we don't know what the user then did on the site.
SO...
If you are a bit more techie you could get the server to identify the referrer and look for the 'q=' parameter then place the 'answer' to this parameter as a # within the URL string of your own site.
So the above example would be www.noporkpies.com#no+pork+pies
by having 'setAllowAnchor(true)' Google Analytics will track # so you will see each keyword in a similar way to a PPC campaign.
Its messy and stupid but this 'could' be a way round it(?)
5:11 AM
Vandist said...
What kind of tomfoolery is this.
It has nothing to do with privacy and you know it!
Can still see CPC?
The reasons provided for this change are to be frank, insulting.
5:23 AM
JimC said...
Terrible. You are taking away valuable information and refuting much of what it touted as a benefit for Google Analytics.
Plus, this degrades user experience by not passing the keyword thus disallowing sites from providing a good experience.
6:15 AM
OMGriffin said...
@NoPorkPies, the point of the SSL search is to encrypt the entire string. Here's what it boils down to, technically speaking:
Under most circumstances, when you use https://www.google.com your search terms are encrypted and are excluded from the referrer headers that are part of the request sent to the result site you visit. The landing site will still receive information that you are coming from Google, but not the query that was issued -- namely, the host is still part of the referrer being passed.
6:15 AM
vseo said...
No words... What a shame.
Then, If in next future with the "real time premium google analytics" this becomes a paid feature Google would have shown true colors
6:49 AM
Jay Ehret said...
I get it, you're trying to be more like Facebook by making your platform less user friendly.
6:58 AM
Roman said...
Google was always about making the best user experience possible and to let people find what they need.
By taking away conversion data by keyword - this is going to result in bloated websites optimized for every kind of keyword.
Everyone is signed into their Gmail account these days, so the data subset we are not getting is huge.
This move is so Anti-Google...
7:07 AM
ck said...
Isn't it simpler if they only show the keywords without linking to any connected account?
7:37 AM
Niklas Hjelm said...
This will make my work as a web analyst much harder. It doesn't make sense I think we who works with this on a everyday basis deserve better. Please Google listen to your users and remove this "improvement".
/ Niklas
7:40 AM
Jonathan Irons said...
I love the bit at the end: "Thank you for continuing to help us improve Google Analytics."
Um ...
What "minority" of traffic is affected? I appreciate that changes need to be made, but come on, be honest about the effect.
7:46 AM
searchengineman said...
Wow I've never seen such a flame war..I agree with the previous poster..if people want privacy they can opt in..
You're punishing the people who are trying to deliver a decent experience for Web Searchers.
8:15 AM
JB said...
Makes me sad more than anything. I used to be a massive advocate and Google is fast becoming one of life's necessary evils. As a brand that has to sting, no?
As another small business owner I echo the thoughts of others - I recognise that Google are still providing a free service for which I am grateful, but this just makes life that wee bit more difficult for us little guys. And yes, at a time when life is difficult enough.
We're not daft, we know how things work, so please at least do us the service of being a bit more honest about the motivations. If it was privacy you would be removing paid data. Plain and simple.
We have choices, and those choices are exploring new avenues. Let your fingers do the walking.
8:16 AM
Game Razor said...
WTH! GA Data is already private enough!! You dont see the username of the person who searched for the keyword!
You say it will constitute only a minority of your results! But what about webmaster blogs whose users are mostly signed in users?? :/
9:21 AM
dsdsdsaafdsafafds said...
I think they're only doing this so they can claim the moral high ground on user privacy in contrast to Facebook.
But Google Plus is an epic fail and nobody in the general public will ever understand what this means so it's completely pointless.
9:57 AM
jtweav said...
Not okay. Change it back now please.
10:43 AM
JimC said...
@N you are missing the point. By using HTTPS for all logged in users, they are pushing up the frequency of no keywords. That is the concern. If Google+ really takes off, this becomes a nightmare, because by using Google+, you are logged in.
11:58 AM
SEO Grasshopper said...
I rarely complain, but I am befuddled as to how this protects privacy. I just wanted add my name to complaint list here as if that matters.
2:02 PM
Puppet Fan said...
Not happy about this at all.
3:31 PM
SEOValley said...
We're very disappointed in this change. Yes, Google could simply shield user data such as IP without hiding the keyword query. Removing this important feature is never expected from GA.
11:47 PM
SEO Doctor said...
What a joke. Again Google just wanting more revenue. I am really hoping for a webmaster backlash and huge move to Bing.
1:34 AM
Ramesh Singh said...
at the one point you are doing it for users and on the other side you are blocking query data from search. How we analyse such data and how we can refine our content pages? And most importantly why a user would stick on our pages if he/she don't get relevant information on our pages.
2:11 AM
Dean Rowe said...
wow, in one moment I've gone from wanting Google+ to succeed to wanting it to fail - so fewer users are signed in.
SEO/IT crowd generates the buzz that gets regular users on. I suggest we close our Google+ accounts ASAP - if google see's a spike in users leaving they may (although v. unlikely) reverse this stupid decision - internet will become a worse place because of it.
3:48 AM
Dean Rowe said...
Closed my Google+ account - for anyone else it's pretty easy to do - in the account settings in top right corner when signed in.
3:59 AM
Search engine optimization said...
Sorry Google, but this time you FAILED. Please restore or block the services you were providing before rolling out this not provided term. You are going against your own tag line "Don't Be Evil".
5:25 AM
Frédéric Malenfant said...
Some of you did not understand something. Google want to hide search results not to Analytics users, but to enterprise proxy servers who are logging every page opened by every employee. A google search page will not be logged in proxy servers if executed in SSL. That is the protection they want.
That said, THAT IS A BIG FAIL that we will lose keywords from some visites that are executed in the SSL environment. They MUST find a solution. The whole internet marketing is based on these statistics.
5:50 AM
Décio said...
Couldn't agree more with what everyone in here said. And I share the feelings of the author of this post: http://searchnewscentral.com/20111019195/Latest/dear-google-this-is-war.html
Google always have made a pretty good act about how it is important to protect user privacy and how all their systems already do that. And no, we can't see who is who on wither Google tool, be that a loged in user or not. So, obviously this has to do with another issue, one that will make life harder for everyone using Google tools or not to provide a better experience to the user.
And there we go again. Google always promoting a Open platform, and criticizing "other players on the market" who chose not to do it, and then comes this.
Shame on you, Google, to say the least.
6:09 AM
sparefoot said...
This is problematic for SEOs, but is in no way a crime against humanity as it comes off in some comments. This sentiment makes the community look a little whiny, to say the least.
9:48 AM
Charlie Foster said...
Wait, what? What am I not understanding here?
Why in the world would Google stop me from seeing the search queries for signed in users? I'm afraid this is a high percentage of organic visits.
Why?
Is the answer technical in nature? Is it protecting user data?
This is one of those announcements Google should make on April 1st...
This is problematic for anyone that harnesses data to improve their business.
10:34 AM
tscheer said...
I am pretty sure 90% of you are looking at this all wrong. It is not like Google Analytics decided, "hey we just are not going to show search stats anymore." By securing the search, or running searches over https, there is no longer an http_referer, which is where Analytics (and any other analytics suite) pulls that information from. It sucks that https is going default, yes, but complaining to the Analytics team is'nt going to do anything about it.
The http RFC states for this:
Clients SHOULD NOT include a Referer header field in a (non-secure) HTTP request if the referring page was transferred with a secure protocol.
see here:
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec15.html#sec15.1.3
11:30 AM
Andreas said...
This: "Thank you for continuing to help us improve Google Analytics." is a sign that Google has lost its contact to the outside world.
When a company does this to its clients (=SEOs) it would be the least to apologize, not add this standard phrase.
Shame on you Google for leaving the people behind building your success.
11:32 AM
MPrough said...
So it is privacy protection unless I pay the big G for the data... Okay I get it, privacy counts when we are being paid to expose data. Pay Google or lose!
12:14 PM
Jeff Wendland said...
Just wait, they will be charging for this info soon whether it is through them directly or a third party who apys for the rights.
12:19 PM
VabMedia said...
This does not seem to be very helpful to website owners and seo pros.
12:31 PM
Kevin Marshall said...
This is a GREAT opportunity for BING to get our business!
12:41 PM
JimC said...
@tsheer. No, we get it. There was little point in Google posting this on Analytics blog in the first place because the secure search already stripped keywords for those users that opted to use it.
The point of being noisy is to get Google's attention. The head of Google Analytics, Avinash Kaushik should be upset about this move because his tool will become less useful for customers over time. He advocates looking at landing page bounces by keyword.
12:41 PM
frequencydip said...
This is a bum move, we depend on that data that is already anonymous so there is no reason not to show it in GA. What ever happened to don't be evil... Taking away knowledge is evil...
12:48 PM
New Global Ventures said...
Oh Google...Shame on you!
But we'll play along...as always...
12:56 PM
A WORK OF ART said...
Great Info!
1:14 PM
kull said...
Are you kidding me? This is EVIL. I dont trust anymore Google as I used it. Suddenly you will just shut down entire GA, you never know. May I pay to get this data?
1:17 PM
David Michaelangelo Silva said...
Seems like a scheme to try and drive more people to CPC. I don't like schemes. Say goodbye to open Google.
1:17 PM
Shane said...
Seriously Google?
This is stupid.
2:08 PM
Albany Lawyer said...
Not happy about this. The data we see in Analytics is already so anonymous that I can't see how this protects anyone from anything.
I have tried in rare situations to track down individual instances and it's essentially impossible.
2:23 PM
ToKU said...
2:28 PM
ToKU said...
@tsheer
When you click on a result on https you first go to a google http page which redirects you to the final landing_page, in the landing_page you see that redirect page as your referrer, by using that redirect page in the middle they ensure that you still see that traffic as Google but the keyword is removed.
So, they are using the redirect to workaround the RFC and pass just the data they want.
2:36 PM
Hive.net.au said...
Admittly I have not read all the comments, but I do not see the difference of seeing the keyword for a non-logged in search compared to a logged-in search. There is no way that i can see you can identify a user with the results. And it worries me if Google+ gains more traction we will be going from not many people logged to everyone always logged in. Meaning minimum keyword data.
2:51 PM
Anchor Prime said...
Only one reason for this. It only serves to have Google draw conclusions and steer search results to signed in searchers as Google interprets their request based on their search history. And leaves those who work in the space out of the picture for honestly helping lur clients. Users don't need an interpreter for their search requests base on what they did yesterday.
So, there will be two types of SEO required now. One for what only Google knows but won't share and one for the rest of the world.
No character, little integrity, failed mission. So what's new? At least they got Kadafi.
3:14 PM
Zoomdust said...
I think this list of comments say it all. No one can really understand what gives with this decision. We all know that Analytics is secure and getting who typed what into Google and then tracking them to your website is an impossible task. And Google know that too.
I think what Google don't realise is that we are all incredibly adaptive and we'll simply find another way to track this data. Now that could be in an addon that someone develops or a different measurement program. Given that Google Analytics has now become that much more inaccurate in serving key data such as keyword analysis I would bet that it will probably be a different tracking program.
We have already started looking at better analytics programs because there is less and less reason to use analytics.
What gives Google?
3:37 PM
JimC said...
@zoomdust - FYI, all analytics programs will be equally affected. this has nothing to do with GA.
3:47 PM
jrskis said...
(Not provided) is now our second biggest term driving traffic to our website (not including our brandname). This is not a trivial change.
3:52 PM
Rob Taylor said...
This makes me mad.
The internal redirect used for https requests would still allow the keyword data to be preserved and passed through to Analytics users in a way that would adequately address privacy concerns.
This is what is being done to pass data through for PAID search queries.
So, no, it's not a privacy issue. Quit lying. Makes you look bad.
All of our 30+ sites now have (not provided) in the top 5 organic terms.
This makes me mad.
8:07 PM
Kenton said...
Removing functionality that is available via other analytics platforms seems a backward bit of thinking. Looks like the time is right for another provider in this area - other vendors are just a click away if Googler start to damage the goodwill they have built up so well.
1:48 AM
pradeep nair said...
I cannot add anything more to what has already been said by other commentators. ROLE BACK THIS CHANGE.
4:48 AM
EZ-Level said...
BOGGLE??
Are you kidding me? Why do I have to "pay" for this information? You can dress it up, put makeup on it but in the end it still is a dog.
Privacy is important yes, but to basically say to your customers, "we will protect your privacy from those who dont pay for the priviledge".
Its not like the information is CC info or SSN's. It is tracking for goodness sake. It is hard enough to work with GA. It seems that since they are the only game in town, they are starting to leverage that against us by basically saying to us "if you dont like it, to bad for you".
6:43 AM
Fred Gleeck said...
Absolutely 100% RIDICULOUS! A blatant attempt to PUSH customers into paying Google for traffic. I predict a FLOOD of people will look for other tracking tools that will give them ACCURATE information for all searches done by customers. ABSURD move GOOGLE!!!
10:03 AM
outcast said...
This is a terrible idea and you've declared war on all the people who use SEO for a living. Not to mention that you've hamstrung the so called "Google Analytics" experts you have tried to create by charging them for information. Now that these experts can not track what keywords are bringing traffic, you might as well be shooting in the dark for money.
I thought you were about improving the experience for the end user, but instead you're going to make the web much hard to navigate because we won't know what keywords to target.
Right now, my colleagues and I are looking for a new solution to this analytics problems and it won't include you. The interplay between keywords and your website optimizer is now dead. Thank you for destroying my livelihood. I'll be looking elsewhere for a way to do things you used to let me do and you can expect my Google Plus account to be closed.
10:36 AM
Michael said...
Good grief Google...you are totally screwing over the little guy trying to make a living online...
12:05 PM
realityhack said...
Apparently Google is willfully ignorant of the fact that sites use incoming referral data to make their sites BETTER. If people keep landing on my site with the term 'small widgets' and bouncing I know to start carrying small widgets. If they land on page X for something located on page Y I can make a link.
It seems like Google is actively trying to make the web bad with this one.
12:46 PM
Kyle B said...
Worst change to ever happen to Google Analytics. Good job Google. We all feel more secure now.
1:39 PM
Liz said...
As someone who relies on this data to pay for groceries, buy gas and make a living it is very clear:
Google makes more money. We make less.
Looks like they are fine with that.
I'm sure this is just the beginning.
2:14 PM
Smikeo said...
Now they show their face. What have we expected? Big companies always act in behalf of profit and against humas. In the end, this is not about privacy...
4:59 PM
vyperr said...
If anybody sees this as a user centred feature and not a goole adwords centred one (with google getting more $$$) please raise a hand.
Fracly, I miss here the user advantage given that for PPC campaings (Google get paid) the same info is passed who pays google.
5:14 AM
Matt said...
I wonder what Matt Cutts will have to say about this. I'm asking for a resolution for this in the Google Webmaster Tools questions.
Absolutely horrible move Google!!!!
8:56 AM
AnjonR said...
Dear Google,
I am a white hat SEO.
I use this data to create better content and discover new content.
Not to invade peoples privacy!!!
I used to tell people G+ was awesome now I'm telling people that its awful. I used to go on and on about how great gmail was, no longer.
Look at what your making me do!
-Anjon
P.S. Congrats on protecting your strangle hold on paid search
9:36 AM
wholesalebabyclothing said...
This does not appear to be a way to protect the anonymity of the end user.
How many users that perform searches are signed into their Google accounts. Release these numbers so we can understand the effect!
It seems strange that paid traffic stats are not protected. Shouldn't you protect the information of these visitors?
This is all moving toward your more aggressive approach to paid traffic and is really crazy!
Forcing people to adopt a new method is not the way to go, and really contradicts your 'Dont Be Evil' motto.
You do offer a good product, but this step means I (and many others) will have to start looking for other means to measure this data.
3:03 PM
Paolo Ramazzotti said...
Just as Rand Fishkin said I believe it is a tactical move in order to stop favouring other ad serving platforms.
3:59 PM
ChrisM said...
This certainly does seem to be a privacy thing, otherwise AdWords data wouldn't carry through either. This sounds like a monopoly move, which is sad coming from Google.
Unhappy Googler.
4:30 PM
r00t said...
good move , but why is it still available for adwords ?
6:38 AM
Kenn said...
Guess I'll just abandon Google Analytics and start relying more on Bing's webmaster tools. They're only getting better anyways, while the big G seems to be getting worse.......
4:28 PM
Jancar said...
Absolutely stupid decision!.
11:39 PM
dunmo said...
Why is google changing their rules daily? but thanx for updating us.
12:50 AM
Karl said...
I used to love Google. Not anymore!!! This is total BS. what are they thinking??? worst and most stupid action by Google.
6:07 AM
Kaplan International said...
9:29 AM
mitch said...
measure the effectiveness of your website and marketing efforts seems to be getting more evsive and confusing to us webmasters
11:36 AM
ecommerce-consultant said...
piwik........here we come
and in our millions too
1:08 PM
adbluenews said...
This news is very frustrating, they are clearly doing this to increase adwords revenue, despite the fact that we as a company still have 1000's of keywords in googles top 10 SERPS we still spend £50k/ year on adwords, we use adwords on both keywords we do have in the top 3 results and ones that are not, the only difference being that we invest more money in those keywords not performing so well in the SERPS if we don't know what those words are then we will not make that spend. This is a poor call from Google and goes against the fundamental core concepts which they originally developed analytic's for... they are also giving facebook an opportunity to offer a highly desirable service which people still need and want. I used to be pro google but now I'm finding more reasons to invest my company's money in facebook...
1:17 AM
bdizzle said...
This is horrible news. One of the main reasons for using Google Analytics is to accurately track how users find your site. Now that data will be severely impacted by this new change. There doesn't seem to be a valid explanations either..."protecting personalized search results"? What? The data is anonymous anyway, it's like I can use Google Analytics to determine which Google user has searched with a certain keyword.
I'm really shocked and dismayed by this change. I hope you have a change of heart and bring back all organic keyword data.
8:35 AM
9494294852 said...
11:24 AM
SHTFgirl said...
Google, it is so cheesy and lame to insult us with your absolute lie, "Making these changes to secure search"...Come ON! Its about money. Just be upfront about it instead of treating us like a bunch of idiots. That is what makes me boil more then the changes..which suck, by the way, but its your company you can do what you want. Just be transparent with your intentions. you are dealing with 'people' - trust is very important in building lasting relationships.
11:35 AM
MobilityPost said...
4 years of tracking data consistantly down the tubes. Thanks, but no thanks. I don't see any security benefit - there's more to this than what is being described.
11:56 AM
blake said...
Terrible move, white hat techniques to effectively help the user are diminished by this move. I am writing congress.
11:46 PM
LakiPolitisMediaDesign said...
This is absolute garbage and you know it. This isn't to protect the user, if anything it detracts from user quality. If I don't know what content is most interesting and most searchable, I can't build and deliver more of the same. ...Unless I pay for my traffic.
I can't believe that you would be protecting privacy any more or less by selling me this information than you would for giving it to me organically. I followed all the rules, set up my site correctly, and spend a lot of time utilizing your tools to optimize my site so that your users can receive more quality content. And now I'm being told that if I'm not paying you for every single visitor, I may not know exactly what all of them are searching for?
This is an outrage and a complete slap in the face to all of us white-hat SEOs. Thanks, Google, I'll be recommending to EVERYONE to start using Bing. At least with Bing they'll provide me with NECESSARY information - organically.
7:40 AM
LauraVTP said...
Bad move google. You preach to us about keyword mining and optimizing our site based on what we learn about keywords. Now take it away....
4:04 PM
KingDouche said...
This is me blowing my top, jumping in the rafter, and screaming WTF.
I am always signed in. Everyone I know is always signed in. GMAIL is a click away, always. You mean to tell me that I now lose the ability to see what keyword drove them to my site? To see what keywords are performing well?
TELL ME THIS IS SOME KIND OF JOKE.
11:53 PM
roopa said...
I really treasure this wonderful write up. I really appreciate the information you have provided in this article. Thanks a lot! android developer
12:23 AM
Nikki Jones said...
I'm so disappointed. As an advocate of Google, their tools and their business ethos - this news saddens me greatly. For all those times I've fought your corner during professional discussions and in the pub (Yes, I was that dedicated to the Google!)I now have egg on my face. Google this is EVIL. This doesn't just have an impact on the Analytics software I recommend and use, it has an impact on all of the Google services I use, pay for and recommend to others. It's a sad day :( Time to research new tools.
3:05 AM
Collection Agency Authority said...
This is absolutely the worst decision Google has ever made in their history of business in search. I have been a supporter of Google for so long and being a linux administrator, I have always opposed Bing by nature. This has completely changed my outlook on search and Google's ethics and has driven me to embrace what I once despised. Thanks a LOT, Google.
10:42 AM
Harvey44 said...
I am very disappointed.
6:32 PM
Mr Angry said...
I'm starting to see this now in the top 10 keywords report. The major issue I have is that the bounce rate is 48% for this traffic, much higher than the 18% average for the rest of the top 10.
But I have no idea what they are searching for, so I cannot improve the site, increase relevancy or provide links from the page they landed on. It makes conversion improvement hard for this segment, as I am working blind.
3:51 AM
KickStart SEM said...
Through my Analytics panel I can view data on about 80 partner and client websites.
Since this change was implemented, I would say about 12-20% of all organic search queries from Google now show up as (not set).
That is certainly not an insignificant number. Managing and fine-tuning an effective SEO and online marketing strategy over the long-term is hugely dependent on understanding Analytics and user behavior on your website.
To no longer have access to 12-20% of the data available from Google organic searches is a HUGE issue. This change makes me 12-20% less confident in evaluating whether Keyword A converts at a higher level than Keyword B based upon statistical data.
For a company that prides itself on providing the best possible user experience, this change baffles me. Doing it under the guise of "protecting privacy" is insulting to everyone's intelligence.
11:27 AM
whipnet said...
One thing I am not seeing mentioned is the sometimes VERY slow search results now.
Since being automatically redirected to https, I have sat for several seconds waiting for a search result. Long enough to think something is wrong with either my computer or Google.
*
8:27 PM
Zack B said...
Not happy, the percentage of (not provided) is only going to increase.
Please make it possible for us to get this information ASAP.
12:05 PM
Supersum Technology Group said...
Just don't add google+1 to clients websites. Its an easy proposal to clients, website analysts and marketers. Promoting google+ just hurts the very people doing the promoting.
1:00 PM
Jill said...
Thanks, Google.
After I have followed you and signed up for everything, this is how you screw me.
6:50 AM
Woodzy said...
I typically find that google analytics reports are skewed in the first place - very nice considering that they are at no cost. This latest development just makes matters worse. Not only do the various values not agree, now I cannot even see all the search results that directed someone to my sites.
BOO GOOGLE, BOO! Bad move.
2:36 PM
ringer37 said...
-1 for google on this move.
my "not provided" is as high as 20% on some of my clients' sites.
10:47 AM
bonhamsurf said...
This is definitely one of the most disappointing moves on behalf of google. "Not Provided" is now at the top of my search terms for most of my sites. We now can't see most of our traffic sources. Why?
11:42 AM
ST701 said...
Fix this issue ASAP
10:18 PM
shanghai said...
Absurd. By what standard over 10% is a "small percentage"? This significantly reduces the chance to prove to our clients the sources for relevant traffic.
3:44 AM
shanghai said...
This also has nothing to do with privacy: first off, because you keep showing results to advertisers (and don't count on me spending in Google when it comes to that), second, because this information is anonymous anyway. What's your point??
3:46 AM
BuySurety.com said...
A nice popup message for my site visitors who are logged into to Google and thus having their user experience hijacked:
"Dear Logged-in Google User,
Unfortunately, Google is withholding some key information from us that would help us personalize your experience on our site. Although we don't know what Google plans do to with that information (namely your search term(s)), we strongly recommend that you log out of Google anytime you search the internet, and/or switch to a more user-friendly search engine such as Bing."
I like it!
8:30 AM
Tom Crandall said...
Just check out my Google Analytics today and "Not Provided" has jumped to the Number 2 position accounting for almost 10% of my keyword traffic.
Keywords are extremely important to know what terms people are using to find content.
12:48 PM
Hack Marketing: Results-Driven Approach to Technology Marketing said...
More than 50% of searches now come up as "not provided." This makes Google Analytics boarder line useless. This is a very bad move for people who search, vendors and longer term, for Google too. I blogged on this: http://www.hack-marketing.com/2011/11/not-provided-by-google.html
1:57 PM
Hack Marketing: Results-Driven Approach to Technology Marketing said...
More than 50% of our organic search numbers are now "not provided." This screws everybody up. We get blinded and can't optimize based on keyword behavior, which turns into inferior search quality for people, which turns into bad news for Google.
6:16 PM
WLShoes said...
Wow. Way to bun-jam the entire industry Google. "Not Provided" is now #1 in my site's search terms and we get well over 15k hits a month...
This just goes to show you that Google has WAY too much influence on the entire internet and online marketing community.
7:39 PM
Summer Glow said...
I actually love this, this helps level up the battlefield for marketeers
4:02 AM
Ameet said...
Not provided data now makes up 20% of my e-commerce site's traffic and revenue. This data is extremely important to us, and I'm really disappointed by this change. It's also way above the original "single digit" figure that Matt Cutts had publicly reported.
1:37 PM
WebsiteTipps said...
I have a lot of encrypted_search_terms in my wordpress site stats for the last week 27%!
3:08 PM
Shilo said...
The ubiquitous "not provided" two weeks ago was in third place on my analytics, today it is #1 with 16% of the results. For us to figure out how to provide better Google search results without the top keywords used to search for our products is difficult, considering that Google Analytics was set up for that purpose, correct? Are keywords now thought to be a security breach? Please work this one out Google.
4:59 PM
Jordan said...
22% of my search traffic...
Why not switch to the name Goopple. Google is becoming more and more like Apple everyday. So disappointing.
10:03 AM
Mike said...
Simply put, Google lied about it being a "fraction" of the traffic. I am working with several clients, and for each and every one "not provided" is the top organic search result. All of them. For some, it's more than half of the users. I suppose this all makes sense; Google wants to make sure that everybody uses Adwords, so they are trying to make any other way to get to a website as difficult as they possibly can. Whatever happened to their creedo "Don't Be Evil"?
10:19 AM
SEOJacksonville said...
As frustrating as this is we are talking about a free analytics software. We are at Big G's mercy.
1:55 PM
pcampagna said...
This is total CRAP! How am I supposed to explain to my superiors that the keywords used to get to our site is (not provided) because google wants to eep all of that information to themselves. I'm sure its to make them more money somehow, but they are screwing loyal customers who use these tools to make their business better!!!!!!!! this is total BS!!!!!
9:07 AM
Donald Organ said...
This is not something that is just limited to Google Analytics, so people are not complaining about free analytics software....
If you use a 3rd analytics package you will not see the search terms/phrases in your analytics anymore because google is passing the parameter over empty....
Also 3rd party SaaS solutions such as recommendation engine will not be able to collect this information for analysis or for making recommendations based on that term and the things people have likely purchased based on that term....
10:38 AM
frontpor said...
Over 100 manged client sites and "not provided" is top 2 in 91% of our sites. :(
3:38 PM
Living Streams said...
The explanation of why this has been done just isn't good enough. Telling us the search phrase used which resulted in the visit, tells us nothing about who the website visitor was.
If you know of a way of digging out some useful information on the identity of visitors, then remove this and leave us with just the search phrase information.
3:07 AM
John said...
thanks to telling us about this release but i am agreeing wih other that if we are getting much traffic from particular term then it must for us to know. it does not matter who login or not.
7:07 AM
camper said...
i found this out by searching my web logs not analytics. My 15 years on the net has taught me a lot of things. One thing that google needs to consider is that NO Site (Not even the big G) stays on top forever.
Yea it may seem like nothing can knock you off the top. One day google will find itself forced to care about the websites it sucks it's profits from in order to stay profitable.
In the meantime chalk one up for "do no evil". Everyone knows that as website owners we can't tell who comes to our site unless that person wants us to know. What's the big secret?
If we can't tell what people are searching for and when they find us then it turns SEM into a big crap shoot.
5:49 PM
Ced Said said...
The worse part about this, Google Premium cost $150,000 per year. What happened to subsidized by ads? I am very disappointed Google and I may need to rethink how we proceed. This even breaks Coremetrics and other tools. 66% of our users are logged in so we have no Keyword Data to make inform decisions...Please change it back Google.
3:02 PM
Joao Queiroz said...
Google Analytics is a great and powerful tool but this... what a terrible idea... I don't know how can this feature improve people's lives in any way. I am sure there is way to protect privacy without having to hide the search terms. Please reconsider and get around this issue some other way!
2:46 AM
Manoel Netto said...
Since this data is anonymous, there's no reason to hide the keywords from site owners.
It's contraproductive too, since we use this data to provide better content/products/services to visitors.
You're walking backwards, guys.
10:36 AM
Kalavati said...
Ok Google you are startign to get a steely evil look in your corporate eye!!!
This doesn't make sense as so many others are saying, it's like "double speak"
I'm a little guy, I jsut want to see what words are drawing folks to my site-why even bother providing GGle anyalitics anymore-teh whole purpose is lost lost!! We never saw anyones name or identity and you know it. BAd,sad move that is only about money for you not users not providers either.
11:31 AM
JB @ Cams said...
Even though analytics will not show the secure search, are those keyphrases/keywords logged for when someone does an ad campaign or in webmaster tools when you see an aggregate number as opposed to individual numbers?
12:12 PM
swese44 said...
This is not a minority. "(not provided)" is the #1 or #2 organic search keyword displayed for every one of my websites. This does not protect anybody's privacy, it just makes it impossible to measure my performance for certain keywords.
The #1 reason I use analytics is to watch search traffic and see how webpages are performing for specific keywords. Basically pointless now.
What happened to "do no evil?" This was clearly implemented for reasons other than protecting users' privacy. If I worked on Google's Analytics team I would be very unhappy with the Search team for hiding this data, and furious with them for requiring me to publish a blog post to spin it as being in the users' best interests.
12:33 PM
Sharp AN3DGS10 3D Glasses said...
Well I think this is a travesty and another reason to look for a different analytic tool.
Google...
You the biggest joke on the planet and since your accountable to share holders it's no wonder all we see in the top 3 of search results are the big box stores and Amazon.
Google will not exist in ten years on their current path.
5:01 AM
Steve C said...
What is the recommmended method for comparing search traffic from this year and last?
10:00 AM
ClickSSL said...
{not set) is usually traffic from the Google Display Network. You often find this when you forget to disable the display network in your AdWords campaign.
12:19 AM
Post a Comment