: What benefits are there to having both HTTP and HTTPS protocols indexed by Google? Using HTTPS seems to be standard and more and more sites are making the switch and redirecting all users from

@Caterina187

HTTP sites are (negligibly) faster than HTTPS sites due to not needing to negotiate encryption.

See this question I asked in 2012 for more details:
https (SSL) instead of http for mobile users

Practically speaking, I work with a well-known university and they tried to switch to HTTPS only about a year ago...

If memory serves, their (well known) cloud hosting company didn't support TLS 1.2...or maybe it did support 1.2 and didn't support 1.1.

I forget.

Point is, they had to abandon HTTPS only/preferred because one of their DNS/Hosting providers didn't fully support the HTTPS protocols that their users would require.

Let's just say that it's best to have a website that is useful to as many people as possible, regardless of protocol.

Vote Up Vote Down

@Goswami781

None. This is harmful for SEO, and is likely to result in duplicate content issues, split inbound link profiles, incompatibility with secure iframes, and other such unpleasantness.

The reason you see both in the index is either lack of knowledge or presence of technical issues on the website's end. Maybe they didn't specify in Search Console that only one version should be used, the https version. Maybe they didn't properly redirect the http version. Maybe they didn't use canonicals to point to the secure URL's.

Now, a website may have both secure and non-secure pages in the index. For example, let's say you have a secure site, but one page has an iframe that's necessary but isn't secure. In such cases, all pages in the index should be secure, with one http page to match the non-secure iframe. But having both versions of the same page in the index should not be an option.

Vote Up Vote Down