So Outside Technology Security CMS
AnQiCMS
Online Demonstration

The new default intercept value only manages new domains, old domains need to be moved manually.

📅 2026-11-01 👁️ 0

The new default blocking value of the platform only applies to new domains connected, and the old domain names already on the platform need to be manually adjusted where? The adjustment needs to be made at the crawling control level. The default value will not go back to rewrite the configuration of existing domains. The effective value of the old domain name is still the set at the time of connection. Therefore, the first step is not to change, but to confirm the current situation category by category, and then decide whether to change or not

Why do we need to control the old domain names even if we don't change them

The orientation of the new default value is very clear: spiders classified as training and proxy types are intercepted by default on pages displaying ads, while retrieval types continue to be allowed. This treatment only takes effect for new domains connected after September 15, 2026. Old domains are not concerned about it, and two types of risks may arise: content-based sites may think that the platform has already opened up by default, but in fact, the old mandatory interception is still in place; sites that do not want to be harvested in bulk may think that they have been blocked, but in fact, training types are still crawling. Both types of misjudgments come from treating the 'new default of the platform' as the 'current configuration of mine.'

The steps for confirming the three types separately

Firstly, divide the crawlers into three categories based on their purpose: training, proxy, and retrieval. Then confirm two things for each category: first, the current effective value of the classification switch on the platform side, and second, whether the in-site rules cover this category. The conclusions of the two things should be recorded together; looking at only one side will lead to opposite judgments.

Confirm the order suggestion starting from within: The robots configuration is a text layer that the site owner can read and write directly, first confirm its current grouping status by user groups; then look at the classification on the platform side; finally, look at the list of modules related to crawling in the background. It is clear which segment each module in this batch related to GEO and SEO manages, and only then do you know which one to move. The llms.txt exports facing large language models also need to be confirmed separately, as it manages how the content is organized, but does not mean it is allowed to be crawled.

How to merge with the existing rules within the site

The platform rules and the in-site rules are not substitute relationships, merging to see there are three typical conflicts. In-site release and platform mandatory拦, manifested as the request is rejected but the robots text is not prohibited; in-site prohibition and platform release, manifested as the guidance is not effective but the crawling still occurs; the two sides group口径不一致, manifested as the proportion of some manufacturers is obviously separated from others.

It is recommended to clearly define boundaries within custom programs: the robots.txt text only expresses intentions, and mandatory processing is entrusted to the platform and rule layer, keeping the grouping criteria the same. In systems like AnQiCMS, crawl control and sitemaps, and llms.txt belong to different entry points. When making changes, record what was changed for each entry to avoid making multiple changes at once.

How to verify after the modification

Check the actual return status, not the configuration text. After the change, count the request volume and return status separately for three types of crawlers, test one item at a time. Keep two records before and after the verification: only comparison can show that the shift comes from this change, not from the sample composition or platform default.

If the verification results are inconsistent with the expected, go back to the group口径 check first: when there are multiple identifiers in the same group, only writing one of them will appear the phenomenon of 'changed but not effective', this kind of problem is not hierarchical conflict, but insufficient coverage.

Common questions

Ask: Do the old domain name need to be changed with the new default value? Answer: First confirm the currently effective value before deciding. The new default value does not automatically overwrite existing configurations, whether to change or not depends on your content monetization orientation.

Ask: Can the configuration file be verified? Answer: No. You need to check the request volume and return status of the three types of proxies, and the configuration text can only prove what has been written.

Ask: If the robots have been changed but not effective, what should be checked first? Answer: First check the coverage of the group, whether the same family identifiers are all written into the rules; then check whether the directions of the platform and the two layers within the site are opposite.

Related articles

Is there any advertisement on the page, and will it change whether the AI crawler can read the content?

Whether there is advertising on the page will indeed change whether the AI crawler can read the content: the new platform default value treats whether to display advertising as a judgment condition, the pages with advertising are intercepted by default for training and proxy types, and the search type continues to pass. This rule is not in the robots file, but occurs on the platform side, so there may be two sets of visibility in the same site with advertising templates and without advertising templates, and it should be checked separately according to the template.

2026-11-01

Why would the proportion of different AI crawlers intercepted by the same site differ by a few points?

The same batch of sites intercepts AI crawlers from different manufacturers, and the intercept ratio differs by several points, mostly due to the rules being written according to the user group name, while each proxy's identifier is not just one: omitting one will result in a difference in the ratio. When checking, first distinguish between the three meanings of no file, empty file, and release, and then rewrite the rules by grouping for use, and finally verify the returned status of each one by using the site map entry and real crawling records instead of just looking at the configuration text.

2026-11-01

The proportion of AI crawler interception changed between two months, is it changed by the default value of the platform or the webmaster?

The same batch of domain names has changed the proportion of AI crawler interception in two months, most of which come from the launch of platform default values, not from webmasters changing configurations one by one. By looking at the direction of change, it can be distinguished: the displacement is concentrated on the training and proxy sides, while the search class has not moved much. When comparing, first lock the same caliber and the same industry level, and then confirm the configuration of robots files, platform classification switches, and in-site exit one by one, changing one and measuring one to attribute.

2026-11-01

After a website is attacked, it is necessary to restore the backup, should the vulnerability be patched first or the data be restored first?

The order of disposal is to first cut off the entry that can be reused again, install the affected programs and extensions, and then recover from a known good backup. Restoring data will bring back the time points with backdoors, and the repeated infections are mostly caused by this. After recovery, it is also necessary to check the accounts, scheduled tasks, and modified files, and confirm whether the deleted content still stays in the recycle bin.

2026-11-01

Why do we need to tighten the registration entry first and then patch the multi-site user registration open?

The reason why a multi-site with open user registration needs to tighten the registration entry first and then patch it is because the triggering conditions of this kind of risk are written together: registration is open, and ordinary users can create new sites. Closing the registration during the patch window period and restricting the permission to create new sites can directly cut off the attack entry; after patching, it is also necessary to check back on the sites that have been created and to synchronize the backup and permission review.

2026-11-01

Why is it necessary to limit server access to internal network addresses in the place where external links can be filled in the background?

The place where external links can be filled in the background needs to limit the server's access to the internal network address because the server will replace the user to retrieve this address: Once the link verification is bypassed, the request can be sent to the link-local address range, exposing the internal network service to external inputs. The verification should be done both at the time of writing and before the request, and then supplemented by the outgoing network limit, especially for entry points such as importing and remote image retrieval, which should be separately controlled.

2026-11-01

The alias of the article address can be listed externally, where should the list interface receive it?

The article address alias can be enumerated externally, usually requiring two conditions to be met: the alias can be guessed according to a regular pattern, and the list interface allows bulk pagination return. Therefore, the bottleneck is on the interface side rather than the page side, and it is necessary to limit the scale of single returns, set the exposure range according to the domain, and tighten the access to unpublic content. This article explains the conditions for enumeration, what list is exposed, and the location to be checked for internal interface.

2026-11-01

The confirmation process for members changing their email addresses is bypassed, and what else does the account side need to verify?

The confirmation process of changing the member's email binding is bypassed, which means the bypasser has obtained the password recovery channel. The account side needs to verify not only this logic. This article explains why property changes require two-way confirmation, how user groups and access permissions should be tightened, the role of email reminders in the process of handling, and provides four records to be checked after the repair.

2026-11-01