[phishstiiix]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do we have any evidence that user #363 is the only superaccount? IMO this number is disturbingly large to apply to an account with this sort of power, any idea as to how many other superaccounts could be in use or could have been used in the past?

[/ QUOTE ]

The relatively high user number should not suggest that this is not a superuser. Depending on the robustness of the software development practices many testing accounts with different access privileges could have been created on the fly.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, and this is what worries me.

[/ QUOTE ]

it worries me in regards to other sites too. hopefully i'm just being a tin-foil-hat weirdo, but it seems that other sites would go through some of the same processes that AP did when creating the site in the first place.

who's to say that there aren't these super accounts at other sites? granted i really really really doubt that anything like this would ever happen at stars and if it did, they would probably be a little more honest with us than AP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would be very surprised if these types of accounts weren't used in the development of most sites' software programs. The creation of an account like this without the forethought to delete/permanently deactivate it is very surprising, unless perhaps it was still used regularly by AP programmers to test new software updates, new games and the like?

At least this whole episode will likely make the other sites review their own security procedures regarding their superaccounts (if they in fact exist).