[Bug] Usage limits and reset timers are incorrectly mirrored across multiple separate accounts

Description
I am experiencing a critical technical issue where the usage limit quota and reset countdown timers are being identically mirrored across 5 completely separate accounts.

I have previously verified that this is not expected behavior; usage limits should be calculated strictly per account, and they should not be shared across different Pro/Max accounts, even if accessed from the same IP address or device. However, currently, consuming tokens on one account simultaneously depletes the quota on all other accounts.

Affected Accounts
Here is the list of my 5 separate accounts experiencing this shared quota bug:

nerve011235@gmail.com (MAX $200)

mk55911@proton.me (MAX $200)

mk55992@proton.me (MAX $200)

mkgt3rs@proton.me (MAX $200)

mk911tb@proton.me (MAX $200)

Expected Behavior
Each separate account should have its own independent usage cap, progress bar, and reset timer, regardless of the network (IP) or device used to access them.

Actual Behavior
When one account hits the usage limit (or drops to a specific percentage, e.g., 65%), the remaining accounts immediately reflect the exact same percentage and show the exact same reset countdown timer. It appears the backend system is incorrectly pooling these separate accounts together based on IP or Machine ID.

Steps to Reproduce

Log into Account A (nerve011235@gmail.com) and consume usage.

Check the remaining usage percentage and reset timer in Settings -> Usage.

Switch to Account B, C, D, or E on the same device/network.

Navigate to Settings -> Usage on the alternative accounts.

Observe that the usage progress bars and reset countdowns are perfectly synchronized across all 5 accounts.

Attachments / Evidence
(Please find attached the screenshots taken simultaneously across the accounts showing the identical usage bars and reset timers.)

Environment

Platform: Claude Code CLI

Time of Observation: March 31, 2026, approx. 4:00 AM KST

Please investigate this as a backend routing or rate-limiting bug. Thank you.