Why you shouldn't use URL masking, forwarding or cloaking

Even though it was common years ago, it’s now an outdated practice that creates more headaches than it solves. At urllo, we’re often asked about masking and we always give the same advice: don’t use it. In this article, we break down what URL masking is, why it’s risky and what smarter alternatives you can rely on.

What is URL masking?

URL masking is a technique that keeps one URL visible in the browser while the actual content comes from another site. It works by loading that external content inside a frame, so the website owner controls the displayed URL even though the content isn’t theirs. Sometimes called masked URL forwarding, it essentially uses your domain to show a different website within an iframe.

Types of URL masking (and why they’re confusing)

Link masking / masked links

Using a redirect or script so the visible link appears different from its destination. Common in old affiliate practices.

User clicks:
https://mybrand.com/sale

Actual destination:

https://randomstore.com/promotions/affiliate123?ref=9823

But the browser still appears to show:

https://mybrand.com/sale

Key trait:

It affects a single link, not the entire domain.

Domain masking / masking domain / name forwarding

A domain forwards to another site but displays the original domain using an iframe.

Example: mybrand.com loads content from partnersite.com while still showing mybrand.com in the address bar.

Related but different: what is URL cloaking?

Cloaking is a technique where a website displays one version of content to users and a different version to search engines, usually to manipulate rankings or deceive visitors.

Common examples include:

• Showing search engines a page about travel destinations, while human visitors see a completely unrelated page, such as one promoting discount medications.
• Adding text or keywords to a page only when the request comes from a search engine crawler and hiding that content from real users.

Why you shouldn’t use URL masking or cloaking

URL masking creates problems across SEO, security, usability, branding and analytics. These issues affect both small websites and enterprise platforms. Here’s why we don’t recommend or support masking today.

1. SEO risks: URL masking damages ranking and visibility

The issue with URL masking is that the masked domain doesn’t contain any real content, it’s just showing another website inside an iframe. Because of that, search engines can’t crawl the page, can’t follow internal links and can’t give the masked domain any SEO value. All the authority stays with the real destination URL, while the masked one looks empty to Google.

Even though masking isn’t the same as cloaking, it still creates a mismatch between the URL in the browser and the content being served, which search engines don’t trust. In most cases, they simply ignore the masked domain altogether.

If you’re just looking for a way to allow your domain to show another website, consider redirecting instead of masking. This will allow you to transfer the SEO value from your old site to the new one properly.

Google considers URL cloaking deceptive

Masked or cloaked URLs confuse search engines, especially when the content doesn’t match the displayed domain. Google may deindex the site, reduce its ranking or treat the masked domain as thin or duplicate content.

Masked domains pass no SEO value

If you use an iframe or masked forwarding, your domain never receives ranking authority. Search engines attribute all value to the real destination URL.

Indexation and content issues

When the content shown on a masked domain doesn’t match the URL displayed in the browser, Google interprets this as deceptive behavior. As a result, the search engine may deindex the site, reduce its rankings or treat the masked domain as thin or duplicate content—all of which can severely damage visibility.

In short: URL masking destroys SEO.

2. Security concerns: masked links look suspicious

Masked URLs can appear suspicious to users because they resemble the techniques used in phishing and other deceptive practices. Browsers may issue warnings when a site appears to obscure its true destination, and even when warnings don’t appear, users instinctively trust masked links less, leading to lower click-through rates and higher bounce rates.

For users, cloaked URLs also pose a security threat. URL masking can be used to create malicious websites that hide their real addresses from users for nefarious purposes such as phishing or malware deployment. Even if a website owner has good intentions for using URL masking, it can also be prevented from working properly. It is also used for a practice called clickjacking, which has also been used to trick users into performing actions such as adding likes on social media sites or adding clicks on ads, none of which the user intended to do.

If users cannot clearly understand where a link leads, they assume danger and bounce.

3. Technical & performance problems

Masked URLs break or limit many modern website features:

• Poor mobile performance (iframes don’t adapt cleanly).
• Broken navigation menus.
• Incorrect analytics and conversion tracking.
• Missing security headers.
• Embedded logins or checkout forms often fail.

If your goal is professionalism, URL masking does the opposite.

4. Branding and user experience damage

Your domain is your brand. When someone loads a site but sees content that clearly doesn’t belong to that URL:

• Trust erodes.
• Shareability drops.
• Links look unprofessional.
• Users get confused about who owns the content.

Site visitors are not able to see the direct addresses of the pages that they are visiting on a webpage, which means they are not able to bookmark or share specific sections of a website. If you have content that you would like your users to share and link back to, they are unable to because they do not have the actual URL for each page of your website.

Transparent linking builds brand credibility. Masking harms it.

5. Marketing limitations: masking hurts campaigns

URL masking interferes with:

Affiliate marketing

Masked affiliate links are often flagged as suspicious or manipulative.

Email deliverability

Cloaked URLs trigger spam filters more often, reducing inbox rates.

Social media

Platforms display the real destination anyway, eliminating the “benefit” of masking. Masked links simply don’t fit modern marketing ecosystems.

What you should do instead of URL masking (safe, modern alternatives)

Use proper redirects instead of masking

• 301 redirects preserve SEO value.
• Stable and transparent link forwarding beats mask URL techniques.

Use a branded redirect domain

• Cleaner, brandable links without deception.
• Helps with trust, analytics and CTR.

Use link shortening or tracking tools (ethical & transparent)

• How to maintain analytics without hiding your destination.
• Better user experience than masked links.

Use URL parameters & campaign tracking

• UTM parameters instead of disguising the web address.

Why urllo recommends replacing URL masking with redirects

URL masking may seem like a quick shortcut, but in reality, it creates far more harm than good. From broken SEO value and security risks to user distrust, analytics failures and poor performance, masked forwarding is an outdated technique that no modern website or business should rely on.

Because URL masking has generally been used for malicious activity, we have decided not to support it at urllo. We’ve also put together a few alternatives to URL masking that might be the right solution for you.

At urllo, we focus on clean, transparent, SEO-safe URL redirects that protect your brand and your data. If you need reliable link management, branded domains or migration support, our platform is built specifically to help you achieve this, without the risks of masking or cloaking.

Frequently asked questions about URL cloaking & URL masking

What is a masked link or masked URL?

A masked link (also called a masked URL, link masking or URL masking) is a link that hides the real destination URL from the user. When someone clicks the link, they are taken to another webpage, but the browser still displays the original, masked domain in the address bar.

This is often done through:

• Domain masking / forwarding with masking (using iframes).
• Scripts or redirects that obscure the true destination.
• Link masking tools meant to make long URLs look shorter or more branded.

Masked URLs give the illusion that visitors are still on the initial domain, even though the content is coming from somewhere else. While this sounds convenient, it creates problems for SEO, analytics, user trust and site performance.

How do I unmask a URL?

To unmask a URL, you must remove whatever technique is hiding the real destination. This usually involves:

1. Disable masking in your domain registrar.

Turn off options like "Forward with masking", "Masked forwarding" or "Domain masking."

2. Replace iframe-based masking with proper redirects.

Use a 301 redirect (permanent) or 302 redirect (temporary). Redirects show users and search engines the actual URL.

3. Remove scripts that rewrite or cloak the link

Replace masked links with transparent, clean redirect links.
4. Use a link management tool that provides branded redirects instead of masked URLs.

Once masking is removed, users will see the real destination URL in their browser and search engines can properly crawl and index the content.

Is URL cloaking illegal?

URL cloaking is not illegal, but it can violate platform rules, especially search engine guidelines.

The key distinction:

Illegal: Cloaking used for phishing, fraud or malicious deception.

Against Google’s SEO guidelines: Cloaking that shows search engines one version of a page and users another. Google treats this as a serious violation and may penalize or deindex sites using it.

In short, URL cloaking used for SEO manipulation is against Google’s rules, but not criminal by default.

Why do some sites disguise web addresses?

Websites disguise their URLs for several reasons:

1. To make long or complex URLs look cleaner

This includes affiliate links, campaign URLs with tracking parameters or dynamically generated URLs.

2. To make a link appear branded

Marketers sometimes attempt to replace a long third-party link with a branded domain.

3. To hide the real destination

This may be used for privacy or for more questionable reasons, like avoiding user skepticism.

4. To keep users “inside” a certain domain

Domain masking via iframes gives the appearance of a unified site, even when the content is served from another host.

5. To bypass platform rules or restrictions

Some users cloak URLs to redirect traffic through a domain that appears more trustworthy.

However, these motivations rarely justify the SEO, security and trust problems that masking creates.

Is domain name masking bad for SEO?

Yes. Domain name masking is very bad for SEO.

Here’s why:

• Search engines cannot correctly index content displayed inside an iframe.
• Google may treat the masked page as thin content or duplicate content.
• The domain doing the masking receives no SEO authority because the real content belongs to the site where the content is hosted.
• Essential metadata (titles, descriptions, canonical tags) does not pass through masking.
• Cloaking or disguising URLs can trigger search engine penalties.

In nearly every case, domain masking destroys SEO rather than helping it.

Should I use URL masking online tools?

No, URL masking tools should generally be avoided.

They create multiple risks:

• SEO penalties.
• Loss of domain authority.
• Broken analytics and tracking.
• Lower trust and higher bounce rates.
• Mobile responsiveness problems.
• Security warnings from browsers.

Modern redirect and link management tools provide the benefits of link shortening or branding without hiding the destination. Masking tools are outdated and can actively harm your site or campaigns.

Can I mask a URL without hurting SEO?

Short answer: Generally, no.

Any time you mask a URL, you:

• Block search engines from seeing the true content.
• interfere with crawling and indexing.
• Lose SEO value.
• Risk looking deceptive to users.
• Break metadata and canonical signals.
• Create iframe-based performance issues.

If your goal is SEO, link tracking or a clean brand experience, transparent redirects (301/302) are the correct and safe solution.

By Shannon Young

Customer Success Manager