Choosing a canonical version [closed]

Question

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.

---

Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.

Closed 8 years ago.

Improve this question

I'm running a website that uses an SSH certificate. This leaves for potential CNames: https: //example.com https: //www.example.com http: //example.com http: //www.example.com

From an SEO perspective I understand that it's best to choose one and then set up 301 redirects.

Within Google Webmaster tools one may choose www. and non www. versions. I arbitrarily chose the non www. version. No particular reason.

I then came on this forum for some code on how to edit my htaccess file to redirect all URLs to http://example.com.

I wondered if there was a best practice here. Does choosing a non https version nullify the SSH? From a search perspective are either of the 4 versions better from an SEO standpoint?

Anyone have any experience of thoughts on which of the 4 to choose?

Answer 1

I presume that when you say “SSH” (Secure Shell), you mean “SSL” (Secure Sockets Layer).

“http:” means normal unencrypted insecure http. “https:” means http layered on top of SSL/TLS, which provides encryption and authentication of the website. So yes, using the non-https version means you don't get the security benefits of SSL.

SSL certificates are usually only valid for a single specific hostname. e.g. if your webserver has a certificate valid only for www.example.com, but someone tries to access https://example.com, they will get either an error message or a scary warning. A CNAME is not enough: you need a valid certificate for that name as well. So use the name specified in your certificate. (If, of course, you have paid extra for a certificate that is valid for both example.com and www.example.com, then you may choose between them. But as I probably know less than you about SEO I shall not advise which one is best.)