Well yes – if you have the automation, that is great.
Of course the format of whatever log they send you matters too. I’ve had abuse complaints in a past life where the abuse report was a screenshot from a checkpoint firewall with “Dear team, for your attention” in bright red in a large font. Personally I don’t trash abuse reports that are valid. --srs From: Tom Beecher <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, 22 September 2016 at 7:35 PM To: Brian Rak <[email protected]> Cc: Suresh Ramasubramanian <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: PlayStationNetwork blocking of CGNAT public addresses The format of the abuse complaint doesn't mean anything if it still doesn't contain any relevant data to say what the abuse IS. (Or, even if it IS abuse at all.) On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Brian Rak <[email protected]> wrote: Single IP per email: automated, zero time at all. Multiple IPs per email: manual process, minutes per IP. On 9/22/2016 9:34 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: Considering that there are likely to be many such emails - just how much time is it going to take your abuse desk staffer to just parse out those IPs from whatever log that they send you? And how much time would processing say 50 individual emails take compared to 50 IPs in a single email? --srs On 22-Sep-2016, at 6:58 PM, Brian Rak <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: We've also started ignoring their abuse emails, for the same reason. Their abuse emails at one point contained the line: > P.S. If you would prefer an individual email for each IP address on this > list, please let us know. But, they didn't respond after we contacted them requesting it (and that line has since been removed).
