what is this rel="noreferrer"

[babeterminal]

why is rel=nofollow being replaced by rel="noreferrer"?

[j3rkules]

The rel="noreferrer" attribute indicates that the browser should not send a Referer header when following the link. It enhances privacy by allowing users to avoid leaking referrer information when they click on (or prefetch) links to external sites.

[freecartoonporn]

thats new ., thanks.

[Barry-xlovecam]

https://no-ref.appspot.com/

Interesting. A new way to trash your stats!

HTML5 ref="noreferer"

Introduction

The HTML5 standard introduced a new attribute for anchors:

rel="noreferrer" "indicates that no referrer information is to be leaked when following the link." No shipping browser currently supports this, but support was recently added to WebKit nightlies, so it will eventually be showing up in Safari, Google Chrome, and other WebKit-based browsers.
Now I made rel="noreferer" possible on pre-HTML5 browsers like IE6. The trick is to use HTTPS to do a 301 redirect, all browsers do not send Referer when switching https to http.
....

[Va2k]

Um this don't seem right. Kind of a bad thing for affiliates isn't it?

[CPA-Rush]

good and bad news . u can do it in ff no need to this html tag network.http.sendRefererHeader

[Barry-xlovecam]

Originally Posted by Va2k

Um this don't seem right. Kind of a bad thing for affiliates isn't it?

The link and its parameters, e.g.; the affiliate code and the tracking codes, would still appear in the (sponsor's) stats but the referring domain header would not be enveloped by the tracking scripts and be logged into the stats.

So, it depends on the sponsor's policy if they will accept blind traffic or "no referrer." Links can be tokenized in the parameters received to encapsulate this value but it is a hassle for everyone. Under this scenario, all domains would have to be ''authorized referrers.''

Tokens and SQL look up tables are one of the best ways to secure CPA and PPS. Tokens are how PCI-DSS specs work ... Tokens can replace cookies and cannot be deleted from the user's browser cache.

There are a lot of websites with illegal doings and we don't want referrals from them -- such as child porn and other obscene sites. We have no set policy on ''no referrer'' but this has been discussed around here (GFY) with some drama.

[babeterminal]

so in all its a bad thing for affiliates and i see why some programs are adding it to their emailed fhgs

[Emil]

just what we need after google https :P

[aka123]

I don't get how this matters little to any? On your own site you can control everything. This would be issue only in "spamming" social media, etc. something that isn't your own media (and using affiliate links). So, you guys do that so much that this would be an issue?

[aka123]

I meant affiliate wise. Missing referrer information concern of course everybody and is nuisance.

[Barry-xlovecam]

Originally Posted by babeterminal

so in all its a bad thing for affiliates and i see why some programs are adding it to their emailed fhgs

My first thought is that the capture (having headers for stats) of legitimate link's sources would not endanger an affiliate's earnings. Then I thought a bit more about it ...


The other aspect is that maybe the sponsor doesn't think Google will know where his inbound marketing links are coming from (affiliate -> sponsor landing page). Sort of a soft disavow SEO trick that will not work d'oh

I would be a fool to use ref="noreferer" on the links I give affiliates -- I would mess up my stats and lower my ability to weed out links from any site that could cause fraud or damage our reputation.

[babeterminal]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

My first thought is that the capture (having headers for stats) of legitimate link's sources would not endanger an affiliate's earnings. Then I thought a bit more about it ...


The other aspect is that maybe the sponsor doesn't think Google will know where his inbound marketing links are coming from (affiliate -> sponsor landing page). Sort of a soft disavow SEO trick that will not work d'oh

I would be a fool to use ref="noreferer" on the links I give affiliates -- I would mess up my stats and lower my ability to weed out links from any site that could cause fraud or damage our reputation.

i have been thinking more on this and had thoughts that yahoo was adding more unwanted code like they do with the yui_000000_00000 tracking code they add to every link and image in emails but on checking gmail it is also present there, unless ymail and gmail are working together on this, ?

to the post about editing it out well sherlock don't you think i am doing that already it just gives me more unwanted work

[Va2k]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

The link and its parameters, e.g.; the affiliate code and the tracking codes, would still appear in the (sponsor's) stats but the referring domain header would not be enveloped by the tracking scripts and be logged into the stats.

So, it depends on the sponsor's policy if they will accept blind traffic or "no referrer." Links can be tokenized in the parameters received to encapsulate this value but it is a hassle for everyone. Under this scenario, all domains would have to be ''authorized referrers.''

Tokens and SQL look up tables are one of the best ways to secure CPA and PPS. Tokens are how PCI-DSS specs work ... Tokens can replace cookies and cannot be deleted from the user's browser cache.

There are a lot of websites with illegal doings and we don't want referrals from them -- such as child porn and other obscene sites. We have no set policy on ''no referrer'' but this has been discussed around here (GFY) with some drama.

Awe yea that makes more sense now. Thanks mate.