Overview
CAPTCHA leads Nanotechnology's secondary barrier stack above the norm
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 95% |
| Antibot | 8% |
| CAPTCHA | 33% |
| JavaScript | 31% |
| Rate Limiting | 10% |
| TLS | 9% |
WAF at 95% is the dominant barrier. CAPTCHA (33%) leads secondary coverage. The remaining barriers sit materially lower, giving Nanotechnology a narrow but defined secondary layer.
Barrier Landscape
WAF leads Nanotechnology at 95% — CAPTCHA is the main secondary layer
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 95% |
| Antibot | 8% |
| CAPTCHA | 33% |
| JavaScript | 31% |
| Rate Limiting | 10% |
| TLS | 9% |
| Has robots.txt | 79% |
| Blocks AI crawlers | 6% |
WAF dominates at 95%. CAPTCHA (33%) leads active secondary barriers, followed by JavaScript (31%). The remaining three barriers all sit at or below 10% — a concentrated rather than broadly stacked profile.
Two-barrier stacks are Nanotechnology's most common security posture
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 barriers | 5% |
| 1 barrier | 36% |
| 2 barriers | 40% |
| 3 barriers | 10% |
| 4 barriers | 5% |
| 5 barriers | 4% |
| 6 barriers | 0% |
40% of Nanotechnology sites carry exactly 2 barriers. 19% stack three or more. 5% carry none — a low share of unprotected sites for this sector.
Nearly all Nanotechnology sites are Simple to access programmatically
| Mean recommended tier | |
|---|---|
| All sites | 1.08 |
A mean recommended tier of 1.08 and a median of Simple place Nanotechnology among the most accessible sectors surveyed. 93% of sites are Simple to access; 1% require Moderate or above.
Simple tier covers more than three-quarters of Nanotechnology sites
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 1 - Simple | 93% |
| 2 - Easy | 6% |
| 3 - Moderate | 1% |
| 4 - Complex | 0% |
| 5 - Advanced | 0% |
Simple (93%) is the most common tier. Simple and Easy together account for 99% of sites, while 1% land at Moderate and 0% at Complex or Advanced.
robots.txt
Nearly four in five of Nanotechnology sites publish a robots.txt
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Publish a valid robots.txt | 79% |
79% of Nanotechnology sites have a valid robots.txt. The remaining 21% leave crawl policy entirely undefined — a meaningful gap for a sector of this scale.
Most Nanotechnology sites name one bot or none in their robots.txt
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 | 39% |
| 1 | 44% |
| 2–4 | 7% |
| 5–9 | 5% |
| 10–15 | 1% |
| 16+ | 4% |
39% of Nanotechnology sites name zero agents and 44% name one. A mean of 4.3 is pulled up by a small number of sites with extensive policies, while the median stays at 1.
SEO / search indexing draw the most robots.txt attention in Nanotechnology
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| AI crawlers | 7% |
| SEO / search indexing | 8% |
| SEO audit tools | 8% |
| Commercial scrapers | 3% |
| Social / content scrapers | 0% |
| Archive / research crawlers | 3% |
| Monitoring / uptime bots | 0% |
SEO / search indexing are named in 8% of Nanotechnology robots.txt files, followed by SEO audit tools at 8%. All figures are percentages of all 100 sites including those with no robots.txt.
Uniform per-agent rules dominate Nanotechnology robots.txt files
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Uniform per-agent rules | 48% |
| Path-level mixed rules | 24% |
| Allow-only (no Disallow rules) | 7% |
| Mixed AI posture | 0% |
| Blanket Disallow: / | 0% |
Uniform per-agent rules lead at 48%, with path-level mixed rules at 24%. Mixed AI posture (0%) and blanket Disallow (0%) are minimal.
AhrefsBot leads named Disallow rules in Nanotechnology robots.txt
| Disallowed | Allowed (whitelisted) | |
|---|---|---|
| * | 49% | 32% |
| AhrefsBot | 6% | 1% |
| Googlebot | 2% | 5% |
| AhrefsSiteAudit | 5% | 1% |
| Nutch | 5% | — |
| CCBot | 5% | — |
| Yandex | 3% | 2% |
| adsbot-google | 4% | — |
| Amazonbot | 3% | 1% |
| ClaudeBot | 3% | 1% |
| GPTBot | 3% | 1% |
| Bytespider | 3% | — |
| ChatGPT-User | 2% | 1% |
| Google-Extended | 3% | — |
| ia_archiver | 3% | — |
| Claude-Web | 2% | — |
| Diffbot | 2% | — |
| DuckAssistBot | 1% | 1% |
| FirecrawlAgent | 1% | 1% |
| OAI-SearchBot | 1% | 1% |
| PerplexityBot | 1% | 1% |
| YouBot | 1% | 1% |
| anthropic-ai | 2% | — |
| archive.org_bot | 2% | — |
| meta-externalagent | 2% | — |
Values are percentages of all 100 Nanotechnology sites surveyed. The wildcard (*) leads at 49% Disallow. Among named agents, AhrefsBot, AhrefsSiteAudit, Nutch are the most frequently targeted — focused on non-AI crawlers.
Industry Cohort
Nanotechnology sits mid-table within the Technology cohort
| WAF | Antibot | CAPTCHA | JavaScript | Rate Limit | TLS | robots.txt | Blocks AI | Tier | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biotech | 89% | 13% | 19% | 39% | 17% | 13% | 76% | 14% | Tier 1 |
| Computer Software | 95% | 17% | 19% | 30% | 18% | 13% | 83% | 14% | Tier 2 |
| Information Technology | 94% | 13% | 15% | 36% | 21% | 14% | 68% | 7% | Tier 2 |
| Market Research | 94% | 16% | 22% | 44% | 25% | 14% | 71% | 0% | Tier 1 |
| Nanotechnology | 95% | 8% | 33% | 31% | 10% | 9% | 79% | 6% | Tier 1 |
| Online Services | 93% | 9% | 16% | 50% | 19% | 12% | 86% | 36% | Tier 2 |
| Security Products & Services | 91% | 19% | 26% | 40% | 15% | 12% | 73% | 4% | Tier 1 |
Across Technology, Nanotechnology's barrier rates are broadly in line with peers. WAF at 95%, JavaScript at 31%, and AI blocking at 6% all sit near the cohort median. Tier difficulty (mean 1.07) is below the group average.