Rot13 is a classic in hiding information from ovious sight. An algorithm you would use in toys. That, and it may not be missing in any foundation lecture on history of cryptography. Rot25 is basically "the letter before"; Rot1 "the following letter".

So I got a link to What seemed to be an interesting read on magagement behavior in discount environments turned out to be more of a teaser. Unfortunately, "Spiegel Online" has decided that this specific article is something they want me to pay for, thus the first (readable) paragraph is followed by some nice pay-to-contine-reading-overlay-picture underneath which I'm presented a blurry image of what may be the actual text.

Being a bit nosy, I digged into the source code of the site to find the following:

<b>SPIEGEL:</b> Was heißt das konkret?</p><div id="laterpay-replacement"></div><div 
class="laterpay-under-overlay"></div><div class="obfuscated-content"><p class="obfuscated">
<b>Gjtdifs; </b>Bmt jdi {vn Cfjtqjfm bmt Wfslbvgtmfjufs cfj Qfooz bohfgbohfo ibcf- nvttuf jdi jo nfjofs fstufo Xpdif fjof qfstpofmm 
lpnqmfuu voufscftfu{uf Gjmjbmf cfusfvfo/ Bmt nfjo Wpshftfu{ufs {vs Lpouspmmf lbn- gjoh fs tpgpsu bo {v csýmmfo; #Efs Mbefo jtu tdifjàf² Jdi 
usfuf ejs jo ejf Fjfs- voe xfoo ev tdisfjtu- usfuf jdi opdi nbm {v²# Efs Mboeftdifg wpo Qfooz cf{fjdiofuf tfjof Gýisvohtlsåguf hfso bmt 
Wphfmtdifvdifo- Jejpufo pefs fjogbdi bmt Qsfttxvstu- xfoo fs efs Nfjovoh xbs- efs Cfuspggfof tfj {v ejdl/</p><p class="obfuscated">
(source -- ; line breaks changed).
Essentially a case of "When you see it, you shit bricks".

If I may provide some uncalled advice:
If you feel like delivering the complete article content, regardless of whether it's paid or not, whether it's for convenience or because it you can't change your CDN system (sucks to be you), use a proper form of encryption. Something that's gonna survive a 13 yr old wannabe. Otherwise please, pretty fucking please, don't be surprised if one day there's a page like ruining your business model.

Granted -- as the CSS class implies, the content is not intended to be encrypted -- just obfuscated. Whatever that's gonna change in terms of them wanting me to pay for their content. Maybe it's their way to express "we know ... so we don't even try to claim this to be encryption".

And finally. You should pay for content. You really should. There are hard-working people behind each and every article you find on mass entertainment/infotainment sites. Those sites have the difficult task to provide bored employees with new content all day long. Thus there are masses of underpaid (because "Online" is worth less than "Print", right? RIGHT?!) students who hope that having a publication in "Spiegel Online" will help them starting their career as a journalist.


Stumbled across -- no further comment.