Decisions · Layer 1
Should you design controls for points laundering
Treat points laundering as a chain of suspicious earning, transfer, and redemption events. Monitor value across the chain and intervene at the least reversible step.
Treat points laundering as a chain of suspicious earning, transfer, and redemption events. Monitor value across the chain and intervene at the least reversible step.
## The decision boundary Points laundering uses legitimate-looking events to move value from an abusive source into a usable balance. The chain includes access, earning, transfers, adjustments, redemption, and fulfilment.
## The options ### Event controls Choose this when each earning and redemption event has reliable evidence. The cost is additional operating complexity. ### Network monitoring Choose this when value moves among accounts or devices. The cost is more measurement and exception handling. ### Redemption hold Choose this when final use is high value or difficult to reverse. The cost is a stronger funding and review obligation.
## What it costs you The currency is liability, margin, engineering time, operating capacity, or member trust. In a hypothetical illustration, 2 points per dollar on 400 dollars of spend creates 800 points. At a hypothetical 1 cent value, that is 8 dollars of liability. Ten comparable cases therefore represent 80 dollars of stated value.
## How to decide 1. Name the behaviour or obligation the rule must control. 2. Identify the independent evidence that proves the event. 3. Price the member, operating, and liability cost of each option. 4. Choose the least complex control that protects the least reversible outcome. 5. Set the evidence that would cause a later review.
## What breaks The failure mode is a rule that measures its own success. Keep source evidence, eligibility, issuance, adjustment, and fulfilment separately observable. Revisit the recommendation when the balance has no meaningful value or the event cannot be independently verified.