In other words, you really have no clue as to how these people use email
and what the collateral damage would be. The average small firm/company
doesn't even understand the difference between a mailing list, a blog
or a discussion board. And you expect them to be able to make an informed
I have a pretty good idea how lawyers use e-mail, since I do a fair amount
of expert witness work and do all of the routine stuff (i.e., not of
interest to opposing lawyers) by e-mail. Lawyers exchange some of the
highest value e-mail of anyone, case management messages with courts and
other law firms. If one of those messages gets lost, it can mean that the
lawyer loses a case by default. This is not a hypothetical concern; see
my blog entry at http://weblog.johnlevine.com/Email/barge.html
So if "sign everything" SSP makes their point to point mail more reliable,
law firms will use it in a millisecond. If it means that some other
people won't see some messages they send to mailing lists, they won't
care. If, as I suspect will be more likely, their correspondents will
ignore SSP and whitelist mail from organizations they know, they won't
bother. If a law firm elects to accept e-mailed notices from a court,
there's a multi-step process to ensure that the mail works, and it'd be an
obvious place to add people a local whitelist. But it's a decision they
can reasonably make for good business reasons.
Speaking as a receiver, I have to say I didn't find that info either
useful or interesting.
I wasn't aware that you wrote spam filters for a living.
I wasn't aware that "receiver" was a synonym for "commercial spam filter
vendor." One learns something new every day.
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to