Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124

Have you ever been stuck on a web page, unable to use the back button to return to the site you were previously browsing, and unable to do anything but sigh and sacrifice your entire browser tab? Turns out you may have been a victim of “back button hijacking,” a practice that Google is taking strict action against Starting June 15th.
As defined by GoogleBack button hijacking occurs “when a site interferes with a user’s browser navigation and prevents them from using the back button to immediately return to the page they came from.”
This mobile interference can manifest itself in multiple ways, such as locking a user to their current web page, delivering unwanted advertising or sending users to entirely new pages instead of their intended destination.
Now, Google is adding a feature to hijack the back button List of malicious practices Covered by their spam policies. According to the company, these practices lead to “a negative and deceptive user experience or jeopardize the user’s security or privacy.” This means that the search giant classifies this practice as abusive Unwanted executable files and Malware.
While Google announced its new rules on Tuesday, it will not start punishing violators until June 15. Company blog postThis window is designated for two months to give website owners enough time to make the necessary changes. This entails removing scripts or technologies that insert or replace web pages in someone’s browser history.
Google will also penalize websites that unwittingly engage in back button theft generated by third-party software on the site.
Websites that do not make changes by the deadline could be subject to Manual spam actions Or to automatically lower your rankings in search engine results. Once manual anti-spam action has been taken against a website, it can only be removed by fixing the violation and submitting the site for review.
A Google representative did not immediately respond to a request for further comment.