Cyber criminals are exploiting the world’s fascination with the British Royal Wedding, which is taking place on Friday. They’re using the attention the event is getting to bolster spam campaigns and push rogue antivirus software through black hat search tactics, …

This is the time of year when morality becomes mainstream; just try going a day without hearing references to "naughty," "nice," a scrooge, or a grinch.  It seems appropriate, then, that at SES Chicago, there was a session called "Black Hat, White Hat: Does It Really Matter Anymore?"

Pick a number between 6 and 950 and you’ll likely find evidence, or at least the antecedent number, for a Google ranking penalty. Webmasters and SEOers are in general agreement Google penalizes, and have dubbed them according to their numeric reprimand: -6, -30, -60, -950, and so on. Google inadvertently in cases has acknowledged such penalties exist, but has yet to present any hard and fast rules.

A Danish company provided the daily allowance of raised eyebrows for its claim of offering undetectable cloaking techniques.

If you were, by some chance, to search for “sex” on Google, what sort of sites would you expect to see?  Perhaps we shouldn’t give explicit examples, but a lot of users were surprised when internal archive search results from the New York Times ranked just behind Wikipedia and Salon.

Many SEO specialists have taken exception to repeated comments made by Jason Calacanis, who claims that the profession is mostly comprised of charlatans and two-bit tricksters who rely on little more than shady smoke and mirror tactics alongside technical chicanery to boost a site