Google Analytics: How to filter out "Amazon Technologies / Boardman" bot that creates inaccurate stats

My work server has been getting clobbered lately by some bot program at Amazon.com.

As a result, our Google Analytics visitor and Pageviews are off by thousands each month.

While it might look good in the numbers, it is terribly inacurate as far as real-world visitors are concerned. 

How to Check for Amazon's Awful Bot

Data proving this can be found in Analytics in a number of ways:

Check Method #1

Analytic Reporting > Audience >  Geo > Location > [ Explorer ] tab

     > United States > Oregon > City 

If you see a ton of visits from "Boardman," then your server is getting inundated by Amazon's servers, too.

Check Method #2

Analytic Reporting > Audience >  Technology > Network  

You will likely find, under "Service Provider," two listings for:

• amazon.com inc.
• amazon technologies inc.

Check Method #3

Analytics Reporting > Behavior > Site Content > All Pages

     > [ Seconary Dimension] button > Network Domain

You will likely see amazonaws.com 

How to Filter out Amazon's Run-Amok Bot

So, now that you are sure that some bot on Amazon's server is messing with your stats, you can create a Google Analytics filter.

Filtering is not as obvious as it should be, but creating one is not hard.

First, you need to be logged in as a User with the ability to Edit.

Next, go to the [ Admin ] tab at the top.

Make sure your domain is selected.

Click on  [ All Filters ] tab on the left.

Click on [ + NEW FILTER ] button.

Now, you're going to make two filters,

If you happen to live in Oregon or need to include the city of "Boardman," then perhaps only the first one.

Filter #1:

Filter Name: "AmazonAWS (bots)"
Filter type: Custom filter
Choose: Exclude
Filter Field: "ISP Organization"
Filter Pattern (very specific & without quotes): "amazon technologies|amazon\.com"
Case Sensitive: No
[ Add >> ] YourDomainName.com
Click [ Save ].

Filter #2: 

Filter Name: "Boardman (bots)"
Filter type: Custom filter
Choose: Exclude
Filter Field: "City"
Filter Pattern (very specific & without quotes): "Boardman"
Case Sensitive: No
[ Add >> ] YourDomainName.com
Click [ Save ].

That should take effect in a few hours.

The existing data will not be affected retroactively -- meaning, the Amazon / Boardman filters will only be applied to data from this point on.

You can check to see if it's working by doing the checks above in two days.

If the counts for the bots have dropped significantly or gone to zero, then you know your stats are being filtered and should be back on track ... at least for a little while.

Comment below and let us know if this worked for your.

What size / How big is my Canon camcorder lens / filter

I own a Canon HF M41 (same as M40 and M400) and I like it a lot, but the zoom in and zoom out never quite seem adequate. I can never get as wide an image as I would like.

These types of shots can be improved with lenses that are screwed onto the front of the video camera.

But what size lens should you get?

Find your camcorder manual, and look for these words:

• Lens
• Converter
• Filter diameter
• mm

For the HF M41 Vixia/Legeria manual, I found on page 195, I found:

• Filter Diameter: 43 mm.

Another clue to the size of your lens filters might be the name of the official accessories. For example:

• Canon WD-H43 0.7x Wide Angle Converter for HV Camcorders
• Canon TL-H43 Tele-Converter Lens for the Canon HV Series Camcorders

Note the number "43" attached to the name, however, Canon's website is lax in that it doesn't state this specifically where it obviously should.

Comparison of wide angle lenses

I checked out a bunch of sites and video reviews for this post. They had good points about comparing cheap lenses to mid-range and expensive ones.

• The cheap ones had several issues. 
• Blurriness around the edges.
• Vignetting (dark, circular shadows around the edge)
• Visible edges of the lens in the corners
• Bluriness when zooming in and out.
• Unwanted fish-eye distortion.

Specifically, for my Canon HF M41, I'm looking at the company's own WD-H43 ($200+) or the Raynox 6600 (< $100). I could get a whole kit for $30 or $40 but we all know, you get what you pay for. So, I'd rather put the money toward a lens I'm going to actually use rather than on another cheapo gadget to experiment with.

The WD-H43 gets good reviews (especially for zoom), though users say it is large, heavy and expensive.

The best alternative that I've read about is the the Raynox 6600 which comes in different sizes. I'm not sure why, but some people say they have bought the 52 mm lens with a 43 mm converter instead of the 43 mm lens. I would guess that the 43 mm lens is best, but I haven't bought one yet to know. Perhaps the 52 mm lense fits other gear, too?

• Raynox HD-6600PRO 0.66x 43mm Wide-Angle Lens Mounting Thread
• Raynox DCR-6600PRO 0.66x 52mm HD Wide Angel Conversion Lens

FYI -- Looking at video comparisons of the Raynox vs. the Canon WD-H43, I would say that the latter (more expensive lens) has better zoom quality, but the Raynox has less distortion when zoomed out, is less expensive, and weighs less, too.