Free, Unlimited Money!

Set-Up:

A Household with at least two Members and at least two of them own a Money Account.
At least one Household member has household-level privileges.

Normal Behavior:

The Member with household-level privileges has the ability to transfer money between the Money Accounts of Members in the Household.

The Bug:

A Member with household-level privileges is able to transfer MORE money than the source Account has.
Assume a Household has Members A and B. A owns Money Account $A and B owns Money Account $B.
$A and $B both have a $0 balance.
The Member with household-level privileges transfers $500 from $A to $B.
$A now has a balance of -$500 and $B now has a balance of $500.

The Problem:

The $500 in $B can now be used to purchase tickets to events. Normally, a Member cannot spend their own account below $0 (although a privileged user can, which is good). If users start to notice they can do this, they can mint their own money and spend on credit to their heart’s content.

The Solution:

When a household-level user executes a money transfer, they should not be able to transfer more money than the source account has.
This limitation should not be placed on privileged users, at least not at the highest level.

Do you currently have the setting to allow accounts to go negative turned off? Is there a reason you have multiple Money Accounts owned by different people in the Household?

Confirmed that it is off:

And that is working properly. I have had no incidents of someone paying for an event and thus overdrawing their account. If they have insufficient funds to pay, it just does not show it as an available account to pay from.

The issue is stemming from this setting:

image

To your question, each Scout has a money account. Siblings mean two accounts in the same Household. This is a deliberate policy choice.

Got it, I will get this over to Dave. I am curious if you actually saw this happen by a member of your unit or if it was just discovered in testing?

Someone did it. I don’t think maliciously, but they suddenly had one Scout with a negative balance and one with a positive balance. I don’t think they spent the funds. I confirmed through testing.