Ask
27

96 percent of my traffic is not a browser, measured over a week at the edge

No analytics on the site, so I pulled the numbers from the CDN instead, which counts everything rather than everything that runs JavaScript. A week of requests, by user agent.

Around 83,000 requests a day. 96 percent report a user agent the edge classifies as Unknown.

The rest of it, over seven days: Chrome 2,218. Edge 631. Mobile Safari 84. GoogleBot 35 a day. Filtering to real browsers returning 200, the whole week is 2,647 requests, and most of that is static assets rather than pages.

Two things fell out that I did not go looking for.

The single most requested path on the site is a page behind a login. Roughly 9,000 requests a week, almost entirely from Unknown agents walking a query parameter that has 179 valid values. It is noindex and it costs nothing, but any raw ranking of paths puts it first and it means nothing.

About 760 requests a week go to two URLs ending in "null" and both 404. I checked the home page, a listing page, an article, a profile and the search page for a link producing them. Nothing. It is fuzzing, not a bug, and I would have spent an afternoon hunting for a broken link if I had not checked.

Analytics would have shown me the 2,647 and none of the rest.

10 answers Share
Report

Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

  • @cf_dashboard_daily · 2w ago · 2 replies

    The gap between edge numbers and analytics numbers is the thing to internalise here, because both are correct and they answer different questions.

    Analytics measures humans who ran your JavaScript. The edge measures load. If you are sizing a server, paying for bandwidth or wondering why a cache hit rate looks odd, the edge number is the real one. If you are asking whether anyone read the article, it is useless.

    People quote one at the other constantly.

    26
    Share
    Reply

    Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

    Report
    • @logs_not_analytics · 2w ago

      And the ratio is not a constant, which is what makes it dangerous. Mine is 30 to 1. A site with real traffic might be 2 to 1.

      13
      Share
      Reply

      Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

      Report
  • @crawl_budget_myth · 2w ago · 2 replies

    GoogleBot at 35 a day is the number I would be looking at rather than the 96 percent. On a site with a couple of thousand pages that is a full pass every couple of months, which tells you something about how it is being valued right now.

    16
    Share
    Reply

    Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

    Report
    • @logs_not_analytics · 2w ago

      That is the one that actually worried me too. The bot noise is free; the crawl rate is a verdict.

      1
      Share
      Reply

      Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

      Report
  • @bandwidth_bill · 2w ago · 3 replies

    This is how you find out about bandwidth costs, ideally before the invoice rather than after. Mine was an image-heavy site where a single badly behaved crawler was pulling full-size originals in a loop for three weeks.

    Nothing in analytics. Nothing in the error logs. Just a bill with an extra digit and a very obvious pattern once I looked at request counts by path.

    22
    Share
    Reply

    Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

    Report
    • @logs_not_analytics · 2w ago

      Did you end up blocking it by agent, by address, or by rate?

      11
      Share
      Reply

      Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

      Report
    • @bandwidth_bill · 2w ago

      Rate limit on that one path, in the end. Agent strings lie and addresses rotate, but nobody legitimate needs forty full-size originals a second.

      1
      Share
      Reply

      Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

      Report
  • @wp_admin_scans · 2w ago · 2 replies

    Unknown is doing a lot of work in that 96 percent and it is worth splitting if your edge lets you. Mine breaks down as roughly: security scanners looking for admin paths that do not exist, feed readers, uptime monitors, link previewers, and AI crawlers that do declare themselves but are not in the browser list.

    Only the last group is interesting and it is a small slice of the slice.

    19
    Share
    Reply

    Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

    Report
    • @cf_dashboard_daily · 2w ago

      The uptime monitor one catches people out. If you check every 30 seconds from four regions that is 11,500 requests a day of your own making.

      1
      Share
      Reply

      Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

      Report
  • @wp_admin_scans · 2w ago

    The null fuzzing is universal. Every site I have logs for gets it, always about the same volume.

    1
    Share
    Reply

    Answering anonymously, a moderator will review it first.

    Report