Scanned sites / bing.com / 2026-10-20-0508

bing.com scan from 2026-10-20 05:08:43 UTC DR 93

DR is Ahrefs Domain Rating (0-100, backlink strength), used under its Domain Rating License.

Scan 2026-10-20-0508

Scanned 2026-10-20 05:08:43 UTC, finished 2026-10-20 05:35:44 UTC. Found with 42backlinks.com tool directory

Not a full crawl. The site rate-limited the crawler (25 requests answered 429), so the scan finished early with 5162 URLs left unfetched. Results cover what was crawled.

Site: https://bing.com/

Download SQLite databaseEvery page and asset from this scan, with the crawl events, in one file.

86/ 100GoodNot a full crawl

On October 20, 2026 the Site Spider crawled 696 pages and 22 assets of bing.com, starting from https://bing.com/. It scored 86 out of 100, a good result. 11 of 33 checks found something to fix, led by image alt text (9,269), indexability (126), title tags (123); 9 checks passed. Most of the points went to image alt text (−5.2), indexability (−1.9), title tags (−1.8). 13 checks found something the score does not count, listed as noted. 4 checks were not run because the crawl fetched nothing for them. The list below shows each check's result, the fix plan, when present, explains what to do first, and the security review at the end of the page covers headers, transport, libraries and exposed files.

Security review: Medium3 medium and 3 low findings. See the security findings ↓

Pages crawled
696
Assets fetched
22
Status
Completed
Checks with issues
11 of 33
CoverageJob finished, partial coverage

718 of 6,000 discovered URLs were fetched, 120 blocked by robots.txt, 28,615 left out by the 5,000-page and 1,000-asset budget, 5,162 skipped when the crawl was cut short. The job finished, but the crawl did not reach everything it found. HTML only: nothing here ran JavaScript. 300 link destinations on other sites were checked, 1970 left unchecked.

  • Title tags123 issues
    123 of 126 pages have title issues. 539 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −1.8 points
  • Meta descriptions126 issues
    126 of 126 pages have meta description issues. 539 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −1.5 points
  • Headings126 issues
    126 of 126 pages have heading issues. 539 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −1.1 points
  • Broken linksOK
    0 internal links point at 0 broken URLs.
  • Links to other sites3 issues
    3 destinations answered with an error, 78 could not be determined (timeouts, rate limits or refusals), 1970 were left unchecked by the per-scan cap, of 300 destinations checked.
    −0.2 points
  • Redirects6 issues
    9 redirecting URLs, 0 of them chained.
  • Non-200 responses9 noted
    9 URLs did not return a 2xx response. 7 of them are pages, 0 with an error status; the rest are assets or redirects.
  • Rate limited24 issues
    24 URLs (24 pages) answered HTTP 429 on every try, so the crawler backed off and moved on without analysing them. A site that throttles crawlers this hard can throttle search engines too.
    −0.1 points
  • Indexability126 issues
    126 of 132 indexable pages have indexability warnings. 533 pages noindex by design.
    −1.9 points
  • Image alt text9,269 issues
    9269 of 10701 image references have no alt attribute. 308 use an empty alt (decorative), which is fine.
    −5.2 points
  • Heavy assetsOK
    0 assets larger than 500 KB among 22 fetched assets.
  • Orphan pages7 issues
    7 pages have no internal links pointing at them.
  • Sitemap coverage126 issues
    1 sitemap listing 0 URLs: 126 crawled pages missing, 0 listed URLs broken or redirecting, 0 reachable only via the sitemap.
    −1.1 points
  • Internal link counts416 noted
    Internal link counts for 500 pages; 416 worth a look.
  • Thin content94 issues
    94 of 126 pages have fewer than 200 words. 539 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −1.1 points
  • Duplicate contentOK
    0 groups of pages with identical HTML.
  • URL format693 noted
    693 of 696 page URLs are harder to read, share or cache than they need to be.
  • Canonicals665 noted
    665 of 665 pages have a canonical worth checking.
  • Robots directives563 noted
    563 pages carry a robots directive; 102 carry none.
  • Anchor text55 noted
    55 destinations are linked without useful anchor text, or with nofollow.
  • Title and heading structure32 noted
    32 of 126 pages could use the title, heading and snippet space better. 539 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
  • Image weight and alt length23 noted
    0 images over 100 KB; 23 with alt text over 100 characters.
  • Response anomaliesOK
    No redirect loops, header redirects or pages served as something other than HTML.
  • HTML and head validation62 noted
    62 of 665 pages have HTML problems: 0 with head tags outside <head>, 0 over 2 MB.
  • hreflangOK
    No page declares hreflang.
  • Structured dataOK
    No page carries structured data (126 indexable pages checked).
  • Near duplicates13 noted
    13 pages in 5 groups read almost the same as another page (95% alike or more).
  • Soft 404sOK
    None of 665 pages answering 200 reads like an error page.
  • AccessibilityNot checked
    Not checked: the accessibility audit runs in the browser. Tick "Include JavaScript rendering checks" when you request a scan to run it.
  • Link positions64 noted
    64 of 122 linked pages are linked only from the template, never from another page's content.
  • PaginationOK
    No page declares rel=next or rel=prev pagination.
  • Headers and cookies12 noted
    13 cookies set by the site, 12 missing a protective flag; 14 response headers recorded across 718 URLs.
  • Orphans in searchNot checked
    Not checked: import a Search Console Pages export on the scan page to find pages Google shows that the site does not link to.
  • Link ScoreOK
    Link Score (internal PageRank, 0-100) for 665 pages; 635 hold almost none (10 or less).
  • JavaScript renderingNot checked
    Not checked: this scan did not render pages. Tick "Include JavaScript rendering checks" when you request a scan to compare the served HTML with what a browser builds.
  • PageSpeed InsightsNot checked
    Not checked yet: PageSpeed Insights runs on the top pages once the crawl has finished.
  • Spelling6 noted
    6 words an English dictionary does not know, on 14 pages. Product names and jargon will appear here too.

Where this scan sits among all scanned sites

2291 sites, median 79%, average 78%

bing.com scores 86%, higher than 78% of the 2291 scanned sites. See the full ranking.

0571140%: 0 sites1%: 0 sites2%: 0 sites3%: 0 sites4%: 0 sites5%: 0 sites6%: 0 sites7%: 0 sites8%: 0 sites9%: 0 sites10%: 0 sites11%: 0 sites12%: 0 sites13%: 0 sites14%: 1 site15%: 0 sites16%: 0 sites17%: 0 sites18%: 0 sites19%: 0 sites20%: 0 sites21%: 1 site22%: 0 sites23%: 0 sites24%: 0 sites25%: 0 sites26%: 0 sites27%: 0 sites28%: 1 site29%: 0 sites30%: 0 sites31%: 0 sites32%: 0 sites33%: 1 site34%: 0 sites35%: 2 sites36%: 2 sites37%: 1 site38%: 3 sites39%: 1 site40%: 3 sites41%: 1 site42%: 1 site43%: 3 sites44%: 1 site45%: 4 sites46%: 5 sites47%: 5 sites48%: 3 sites49%: 6 sites50%: 5 sites51%: 5 sites52%: 10 sites53%: 6 sites54%: 8 sites55%: 9 sites56%: 8 sites57%: 12 sites58%: 16 sites59%: 7 sites60%: 16 sites61%: 12 sites62%: 19 sites63%: 27 sites64%: 21 sites65%: 32 sites66%: 36 sites67%: 34 sites68%: 35 sites69%: 46 sites70%: 41 sites71%: 68 sites72%: 70 sites73%: 67 sites74%: 70 sites75%: 71 sites76%: 88 sites77%: 91 sites78%: 105 sites79%: 86 sites80%: 106 sites81%: 107 sites82%: 114 sites83%: 95 sites84%: 107 sites85%: 83 sites86%: 69 sites87%: 73 sites88%: 60 sites89%: 61 sites90%: 33 sites91%: 44 sites92%: 35 sites93%: 21 sites94%: 14 sites95%: 10 sites96%: 9 sites97%: 10 sites98%: 4 sites99%: 0 sites100%: 70 sites86% here100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%

Green 90% and up (Excellent), lime 75 to 89 (Good), amber 50 to 74 (Needs work), red below 50 (Poor).

Internal link map

Loading the link map...

Start page (centre)OKRedirectErrorOrphanLinked from most pagesOne inbound link or noneRings = clicks from the start page. Size = inbound links. Drag to pan, scroll to zoom, click a page to see only its links.

Fix plan

Written by gpt-4o-mini from the scan findings

Several key areas require urgent attention, particularly around redirects, rate limiting, and meta data issues. By addressing these, overall site performance and SEO can significantly improve.

  1. 1

    Fix Redirects

    Why: 9 URLs are redirecting, which can negatively affect user experience and SEO.

    How: Update the relevant URLs to resolve or permanently redirect them correctly without unnecessary hops.

    Checks: redirects

  2. 2

    Address Rate Limiting

    Why: 24 URLs returned HTTP 429 errors, preventing crawlers from accessing important pages.

    How: Reduce the request rate on those pages to ensure proper response; review server settings to allow normal crawl rates.

    Checks: rate-limited

  3. 3

    Improve Title Tags

    Why: 123 pages have title issues, which hinders search visibility.

    How: Revise titles of affected pages to ensure they are unique and appropriately describe the content.

    Evidence: 29 pages share the title "most viewed shorts - Search Videos", which usually means one template writes it for all of them.

    29 pages affected

    Depends on: If these pages really are the same content, the duplicate title is a symptom: canonicalise them to one URL instead.

    Checks: titles

  4. 4

    Fix Meta Descriptions

    Why: 126 pages have meta description issues, impacting click-through rates.

    How: Create unique meta descriptions for affected pages to improve relevance and attract clicks.

    Evidence: 56 pages share the meta description "Watch videos instantly on Bing—enjoy direct playback, disco…", which usually means one template writes it for all of them.

    56 pages affected

    Depends on: If these pages really are the same content, the duplicate meta description is a symptom: canonicalise them to one URL instead.

    Checks: meta-descriptions

  5. 5

    Add Missing Headings

    Why: 126 pages lack H1 tags, affecting content structure and SEO.

    How: Insert appropriate H1 headings on all affected pages to enhance clarity and relevance.

    Evidence: 126 pages: missing h1.

    126 pages affected

    Checks: headings

  6. 6

    Update Sitemap Coverage

    Why: 1 sitemap lists 0 URLs, limiting visibility for search engines.

    How: Ensure all indexable pages are included in the sitemap and resubmit it.

    Evidence: 126 URLs: not in sitemap.

    126 pages affected

    Checks: sitemap-coverage

Generated automatically; verify each change against your own site before relying on it.

Security review

Written by gpt-4o-mini from 16 checks over the crawl

The website has multiple security vulnerabilities primarily related to missing response headers and insufficient cookie protection. Implementing these fixes will help enhance user security against various attacks, including clickjacking and cookie theft.

  • 0 high
  • 3 medium
  • 3 low
  • 0 info
  1. 1

    Missing HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS)Medium

    Why it matters: Lacking HSTS can allow interception of user requests over HTTP.

    Fix: Add the header 'Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains'.

    Evidence: HTTP Strict Transport Security

  2. 2

    Missing X-Frame-OptionsMedium

    Why it matters: Absence of this header makes the site vulnerable to clickjacking attacks.

    Fix: Add the header 'X-Frame-Options: DENY' or use CSP frame-ancestors directive.

    Evidence: Clickjacking protection

  3. 3

    Cookies Missing Protective FlagsMedium

    Why it matters: Cookies without Security measures can be accessed through scripts, exposing sensitive info.

    Fix: Set HttpOnly, Secure, and SameSite flags for all cookies.

    Evidence: Cookie flags

  4. 4

    Missing X-Content-Type-OptionsLow

    Why it matters: Without this header, browsers may misinterpret file types.

    Fix: Add the header 'X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff'.

    Evidence: MIME sniffing protection

  5. 5

    Mixed Content IssuesLow

    Why it matters: Loading resources over HTTP can lead to man-in-the-middle attacks.

    Fix: Ensure all resources are served over HTTPS instead of HTTP.

    Evidence: Mixed content

  6. 6

    Third-Party Scripts Without Subresource IntegrityLow

    Why it matters: Scripts from other domains can change site behavior if compromised.

    Fix: Implement Subresource Integrity on third-party scripts or use a strict Content-Security-Policy.

    Evidence: Third-party scripts

What the checks found

  • FoundHTTP Strict Transport SecurityMedium

    6 of 665 HTML pages send strict-transport-security. Without it a visitor who types the address without https:// can be intercepted on the first request.

    • https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=Z9LH1 → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/maps?FORM=Z9LH2 → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Top+stories&nvaug=%5bNewsVertical+Category%3d%22rt_MaxClass%22%5d&FORM=Z9LH3 → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=Z9LH1&setlang=fr&sid=33ADC2D45ED76F21339BD52C5FF36E87 → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=HDRSC4 → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?view=shortvideo&qft=+filterui:filterhint-shortvideo&q=most%20viewed%20shorts&FORM=SV… → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/maps?q=&FORM=HDRSC6 → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=&FORM=HDRSC7 → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/maps/?FORM=Z9LH2&setlang=fr&sid=0ABB11CA9C536D9037ED06329D166CE5 → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Top+stories&nvaug=%5bNewsVertical+Category%3d%22rt_MaxClass%22%5d&FORM=Z9LH3&setlang… → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Top+stories&FORM=HDRSC4 → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.bing.com/maps?q=Top+stories&FORM=HDRSC6 → no strict-transport-security
  • FoundClickjacking protectionMedium

    32 of 665 HTML pages send x-frame-options. Without X-Frame-Options (or a CSP frame-ancestors directive) the pages can be embedded in a frame on another site and overlaid with invisible controls.

    • https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=Z9LH1 → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Top+stories&nvaug=%5bNewsVertical+Category%3d%22rt_MaxClass%22%5d&FORM=Z9LH3 → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/shop/deals/cashback → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=Z9LH1&setlang=fr&sid=33ADC2D45ED76F21339BD52C5FF36E87 → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=HDRSC4 → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?view=shortvideo&qft=+filterui:filterhint-shortvideo&q=most%20viewed%20shorts&FORM=SV… → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=&FORM=HDRSC7 → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Top+stories&nvaug=%5bNewsVertical+Category%3d%22rt_MaxClass%22%5d&FORM=Z9LH3&setlang… → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Top+stories&FORM=HDRSC4 → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Top+stories&nvaug=%5bNewsVertical+Category%3d%22rt_MaxClass%22%5d&FORM=NSBABR → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Canada&nvaug=%5bNewsVertical+Category%3d%22rt_Canada%22%5d&FORM=NSBABR → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=World&nvaug=%5bNewsVertical+Category%3d%22rt_World%22%5d&FORM=NSBABR → no x-frame-options
  • FoundMIME sniffing protectionLow

    No HTML page sends x-content-type-options. Without X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff a browser may run a file as a script because of its contents rather than its declared type.

    • https://www.bing.com/?toWww=1&redig=8353AC3F5CBE44FEA235448050D75FD2 → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=Z9LH1 → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/maps?FORM=Z9LH2 → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Top+stories&nvaug=%5bNewsVertical+Category%3d%22rt_MaxClass%22%5d&FORM=Z9LH3 → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/shop/deals/cashback → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/?FORM=Z9FD1 → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=Z9LH1&setlang=fr&sid=33ADC2D45ED76F21339BD52C5FF36E87 → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=HDRSC4 → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?view=shortvideo&qft=+filterui:filterhint-shortvideo&q=most%20viewed%20shorts&FORM=SV… → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/maps?q=&FORM=HDRSC6 → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=&FORM=HDRSC7 → no x-content-type-options
    • https://www.bing.com/maps/?FORM=Z9LH2&setlang=fr&sid=0ABB11CA9C536D9037ED06329D166CE5 → no x-content-type-options
  • FoundCookie flagsMedium

    12 of 13 cookies are missing protective flags. Without HttpOnly a script can read the cookie; without Secure it travels over plain HTTP; without SameSite it is sent on cross-site requests.

    • MUID (set by https://bing.com/) lacks HttpOnly
    • MUIDB (set by https://bing.com/) lacks Secure, SameSite
    • _EDGE_S (set by https://bing.com/) lacks Secure, SameSite
    • _EDGE_V (set by https://bing.com/) lacks Secure, SameSite
    • SRCHD (set by https://www.bing.com/?toWww=1&redig=8353AC3F5CBE44FEA235448050D75FD2) lacks Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite
    • SRCHUID (set by https://www.bing.com/?toWww=1&redig=8353AC3F5CBE44FEA235448050D75FD2) lacks Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite
    • SRCHUSR (set by https://www.bing.com/?toWww=1&redig=8353AC3F5CBE44FEA235448050D75FD2) lacks Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite
    • SRCHHPGUSR (set by https://www.bing.com/?toWww=1&redig=8353AC3F5CBE44FEA235448050D75FD2) lacks Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite
    • _SS (set by https://www.bing.com/?toWww=1&redig=8353AC3F5CBE44FEA235448050D75FD2) lacks Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite
    • ULC (set by https://www.bing.com/?toWww=1&redig=8353AC3F5CBE44FEA235448050D75FD2) lacks Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite
    • _HPVN (set by https://www.bing.com/?toWww=1&redig=8353AC3F5CBE44FEA235448050D75FD2) lacks Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite
    • MMCASM (set by https://www.bing.com/videos?FORM=Z9LH1) lacks Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite
  • FoundMixed contentLow

    241 resources on HTTPS pages are loaded over plain HTTP.

    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?view=shortvideo&qft=+filterui:filt… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Top+stories&FORM=HDRSC4 loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?view=shortvideo&qft=+filterui%3afi… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=most+viewed+shorts&FORM=HDRSC4 loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?view=shortvideo&qft=+filterui:filt… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Most+Viewed+YouTube+Shorts&qft=+… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Most+View+Today&qft=+filterui%3a… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Most+Viewed+Short+Films&qft=+fil… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Most+Viewed+TV+Show&qft=+filteru… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Reacting+to+Most+Viewed+YouTube+… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Most+Viewed+Today&qft=+filterui%… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
    • https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Jesser+YouTube&qft=+filterui%3af… loads image http://www.bing.com/sa/simg/facebook_sharing_5.png
  • NoteThird-party scripts

    Scripts run from 1 other domain without Subresource Integrity, so a compromise of any of them changes what runs on this site. (Tag managers and analytics rarely support SRI; a Content-Security-Policy that names these hosts is the usual control.)

    • r.bing.com (38 script tags)
9 checks passed, 1 not applicable
  • OKHTTPS

    All 665 crawled pages were served over HTTPS.

  • OKContent Security Policy

    A Content-Security-Policy is set.

  • OKReferrer policy

    A referrer policy is set through a <meta name="referrer"> tag.

  • OKPermissions policy

    permissions-policy is set on all 665 HTML pages.

  • OKSoftware version disclosure

    No Server or X-Powered-By header is sent.

  • OKForms over HTTPS

    42 forms found, all on HTTPS pages posting to HTTPS addresses.

  • OKKeys and secrets in page code

    No API keys, tokens or private keys were found in the sampled HTML and scripts.

  • OKExposed files and listings

    None of the crawled URLs is a configuration file, backup, dump, repository folder or directory listing.

  • OKSensitive paths in robots.txt

    robots.txt does not point at admin, backup or private paths.

  • Not applicableVulnerable JavaScript libraries

    No recognisable library versions were found in the sampled scripts.

A passive review of what the crawl recorded: response headers, page and script contents and the URLs it found. It does not probe the site, test TLS settings or look for files that were not linked. Generated automatically; verify each finding against your own site before acting on it.

Sites scoring near bing.com

Their neighbours in the SEO rank table, which orders every scanned site by health score.

DR is Ahrefs Domain Rating (0-100, backlink strength), used under its Domain Rating License.

This report was produced by the DIY SEO Hub Site Spider crawling bing.com from its pages as published, the way a search engine does. It shows summary figures only.

Own bing.com?