“Cheat on a test without getting caught,” reads the advert for an earpiece so tiny it disappears once dropped inside your ear canal. “Finally, your nerdy classmates can tell you all the answers!”
The latest gadgets being openly marketed on YouTube, TikTok and Instagram to millions of young people are making it increasingly difficult for exam invigilators to detect cheating.
As AI has already transformed plagiarism and coursework fraud, a parallel technological revolution is now reshaping what cheating looks like inside exam halls.
From toe-controlled invisible earpieces to AI-enabled smart glasses and vibrating dog collars, FE Week has found a rapidly expanding global industry supplying increasingly sophisticated tools to candidates seeking to beat the system.
Experts warn that qualifications across FE are becoming vulnerable to forms of cheating that many colleges and assessment providers are not prepared for.
And as more assessments move online, fraud investigators fear the problem will only accelerate.
Just a whisper
In the past, candidates using covert audio devices often relied on wired earpieces, awkwardly threaded down sleeves. Invigilators could sometimes spot the wires, or other bulky equipment.
Today’s earpieces are tiny and skin-coloured, and can be connected wirelessly to a SIM card-carrying induction collar hidden around the neck.
Niamh Pierce, head of research at the Assessment Security Research Group, a division of VICTVS, says advances in miniaturisation have made cheating technology “more discreet and therefore more effective”.
Some models are so small that suppliers advise users to insert them deep into the ear canal using a magnetic wand. Others require fishing-line attachments or magnetic extraction tools to pull them out afterwards.
One supplier openly boasts that standard metal detectors cannot identify their devices.
The cheaters can pay a heavy price for their misdemeanours, with prolonged use linked to dizziness, headaches and hearing problems.
Doctors in Russia reported a sharp rise in students seeking treatment after micro-earpieces became lodged in their ears during exams last year.
But despite the risks, the market is booming.
Cutting out the middleman
There were 7,615 proven student malpractice cases across GCSEs, A Levels and vocational qualifications in 2024-25, up from 6,310 in 2022-23.
Functional skills qualifications suffered the steepest increase, with cases soaring from 610 to 1,385.
But investigators believe the true scale of cheating is likely to be significantly higher, because advanced technology means many perpetrators are never caught.
“Technology is advancing at a rate of knots,” says Jon Chapman, operations manager at counter-fraud specialist PS3 Limited, which investigates qualification fraud on behalf of the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB).
Until around three years ago, much of PS3’s work involved investigating “corrupt centres” and staff colluding with candidates – and those risks have not disappeared.
In February, four people were arrested at an independent test centre in Winchester for allegedly accepting payments to help candidates fraudulently pass tests. They have since been bailed until August pending further inquiries.
And in March, three men were jailed after helping at least 66 candidates cheat on the health, safety and environment tests required for Construction Skills Certification Scheme (CSCS) cards by training candidates to conceal “cheat phones” inside their underwear.
But such criminal networks are becoming unnecessary since “candidates can now cut out the middlemen,” according to Pierce.
With some suppliers providing downloadable guides on cheating and posting tutorials on social media about how to use their products, candidates can organise fraud themselves.
Lee Fawcett, technical manager at PS3, says those “reaping the financial benefits” are often the overseas companies selling the technology rather than domestic criminal gangs.
The cheat economy
The global cheating-tech market is surprisingly open.
The tiny earpieces mentioned at the start of this article are sold by Monorean, a company registered in Cyprus. Another supplier, Examdevices, markets what it describes as the “most advanced invisible spy earpiece for cheating”, alongside covert button cameras and hidden transmitters.
Founded in Romania in 2004 by “two highly experienced telecoms engineers”, Examdevices says it was inspired by “a frustrated student struggling against one of the walls of our education system”.
It openly states that international expansion, including into the UK, was driven by “high demand”.
Other modern cheating tools include Bluetooth pens that can translate exam text into different languages, invisible ink, and watches, glasses and calculators with hidden screens and live chat functions.
Croatian company 24uki.com advertises a wi-fi camera that allows users to “secretly and instantly stream your exam questions to your friends and family without anyone ever knowing”.
Its “magic calculator” promises to hide “photos, videos and unlimited text”.
Some systems are almost comically elaborate. One “invisible earpiece” is controlled using buttons concealed inside the user’s shoe.
Customer testimonials posted online are blunt about the intended purpose.
A user identified as “Bryan from the UK” praised Slovenian company Unseeyn.us after finally passing a maths exam he had repeatedly failed.
“I sent my test in a second to my friend and he helped me so I passed,” the testimonial reads.
Another UK-based customer, Peter, claimed the device had transformed him into a “top student”.
The products are not just confined to obscure websites. FE Week found “invisible earpieces”, “spy earphones” and even cheating devices disguised as lighters and credit cards openly sold through Amazon listings, with some explicitly describing their use for “exam assistance”.
Online influencers are cashing in with their ‘how to cheat’ tutorials too.
One YouTube video showcasing “8 secret exam cheating gadgets” amassed more than 10 million views.
Some suppliers even offer behavioural coaching.
“They provide training on how to appear natural with the device, to go undetected,” says Pierce.
Madrid-based vendor PingaOculto advises customers how to avoid detection from metal detectors or radio-frequency scanners.
Its website also raises ethical concerns – not about cheating itself, but about exam centres using surveillance equipment to identify devices.
Wearable tech
The rise of consumer wearable technology should keep invigilators on their toes, as they often blur the line between legitimate consumer electronics and cheating tools.
The global wearable-tech market was valued at $87 billion in 2025 and is projected to reach $231 billion by 2034.
Unlike smartphones, wearable devices such as smartwatches, smart glasses and biometric rings are often not banned during assessments. Because they are discreet and designed to resemble everyday accessories, “invigilators may be hesitant to inspect them closely due to privacy concerns or lack of technological knowledge”, says Pierce.
Whereas the “massive lenses” of some smart glasses are a telltale sign that may alert suspicion, others have screens discreetly built into the lenses for users to view preloaded text which remains invisible to nearby observers.
“Invigilators need big-brand recognition,” Pierce says. “You’re looking for things like unusual frame shapes or touch pads hidden behind the ears.”
One TikTok advert claims smart glasses let cheating users “see answers right in front of your eyes, completely invisible to everyone else”.
An app also marketed on TikTok claims to transform Apple Watches into “the ultimate cheat test”.
Basic smartwatches can store large volumes of text and quickly switch between hidden notes and a normal watch face. Higher-end models can receive messages, livestream video or connect directly to covert earpieces.
Some can pair in real time with AI chatbot systems specifically trained to answer exam questions.
Chief regulator of Ofqual, Ian Bauckham
A policy void
Despite the growing sophistication of the technology, many colleges appear poorly prepared.
An FE Week review of college exam policies found that many still focus primarily on mobile phones and older devices such as MP3 players.
One lecturer preparing to invigilate upcoming GCSE English exams told FE Week they were unaware that smart glasses could be used for cheating.
Wigan & Leigh College’s exam guidance poster still references “iPods” and MP3/MP4 players.
Craven College appears to be more up to date. Its policy explicitly states that candidates retaining a “smart phone, smart watch or any other device capable of transmitting or receiving information”, after being instructed to switch it off and store it away may be demonstrating “intent to commit exam fraud”.
Pierce believes knowledge gaps among invigilators are a vulnerability.
“You’ve got to admire the invigilators who are catching these culprits. They can be our greatest strength.”
Nationally, the assessment regulator Ofqual said it finds the marketing of cheating technology to students “unacceptable” and it was up to individual awarding organisations to keep on top of cheating technology
Chief regulator Sir Ian Bauckham recently wrote to exam boards saying there had been a “noticeable long-term rise” in exam hall rule-breaking and urging them to “strengthen your arrangements” to stem it.
“We require exam boards to protect the integrity of their assessments, to ensure their rules about cheating keep pace with new technology.
“Ofqual takes this very seriously. We will not hesitate to take further action to protect the integrity and fairness of the qualifications that students work so hard for.”
Screenshots of TikTok posts
Danger zone
Nowhere are the stakes higher than in construction, where qualification fraud can lead to fatal site accidents and dangerous buildings.
Chapman says criminal facilitators can charge between £600 and £1,400 to help candidates cheat the health, safety and environment tests needed for CSCS cards. Since 2020 at least 10,000 of these test results have been revoked by CITB.
In some cases, organised crime groups use fraudulently qualified workers for labour exploitation and modern slavery operations.
The fragmented nature of the construction certification landscape does not help.
There are currently 38 different CSCS Alliance card schemes permitted to display the CSCS logo, alongside rival “skills passport” systems run by separate organisations locked in a trade mark battle.
“The card schemes are all in competition with each other, and some don’t share information,” says Fawcett.
“But the criminal doesn’t care what card scheme it is. When they find a vulnerability, they’ll exploit it.”
An FE Week investigation two years ago uncovered a flourishing black market in fake CSCS cards promoted through social media platforms. The trade seems to be continuing.
One TikTok user bragged online about returning to a construction site using a fake card after being removed for health and safety violations the previous day.
Chapman says many online advertisements offering CSCS cards are themselves scams targeting desperate buyers.
But while fraudulent cards remain a concern, investigators say fraudulently obtained genuine qualifications are the bigger threat.
“That’s what’s keeping the industry awake at night,” says Fawcett.
Lee Fawcett of PS3
Commercial cheating
The rise of AI has fundamentally transformed cheating beyond traditional exams.
Essay mills became illegal in England in 2022, but new generative AI-powered cheating services operate in a legal grey area.
Plagiarism accounted for roughly one third of misconduct penalties in non-academic courses last year, up from just 5 per cent three years earlier.
More than two-thirds of those plagiarism cases involved AI misuse.
A growing ecosystem of AI tools is now explicitly marketed to students seeking to avoid detection.
CheatGPT promises users they can “cheat with confidence”.
Some educators believe oral assessments and presentations may be more useful in verifying genuine understanding.
But AI systems are rapidly adapting there too.
Tiny earpieces connected to real-time AI assistants like Cluely, which claims to be “undetectable in every way”, can feed through live answers during interviews and presentations as well as in written tests.
Pierce warns this creates dangerous dependency cycles.
“If students don’t actually develop the underlying skills, they may feel compelled to continue relying on AI just to maintain the appearance of competence,” she says.
Jon Chapman of PS3
Social media effect
Meanwhile, investigators increasingly believe the proliferation of ‘how to cheat’ videos on social media is normalising cheating culture itself.
Fawcett says many young people are routinely exposed to influencers promoting AI cheating tools or covert devices through algorithm-driven feeds.
“It just comes up in their stories,” he says.
That creates additional pressure on honest learners who fear competitors may be cheating successfully.
“They feel they should cheat as well, because the bar’s being raised.”
Pierce says students do not even need to search for cheating content for it to appear in their feeds.
“If a student posts a video despairing because they’re struggling with an exam, they’ll get comments offering a nice, cushy service to help them with it,” she says.
Who cheats?
Despite the scale of concern, Fawcett estimates only around 1 per cent of test candidates actively attempt fraud.
And the motivations behind cheating are often more complicated than simple dishonesty.
Some candidates struggle with English comprehension or digital literacy. Others panic under pressure.
Fawcett recalls one candidate who was approached at his home by fraudsters offering cheating services.
The candidate was reportedly fully capable of passing legitimately but chose to pay rather than spend additional time in training.
“He’d rather pay £500 than spend three days off the tools in a classroom,” Fawcett says.
Pierce believes growing AI dependence may also be damaging students’ confidence.
In her previous role as an English teacher, she found learners’ homework increasingly bore little resemblance to the work they produced in class.
Eventually, she stopped assigning homework altogether.
“They have to think on the spot in exams, and it’s a big shock to the system for those who are used to getting answers from AI whenever they need them,” she says.
Cheating set sold on Amazon, with parts disguised as a Bic lighter and credit card
Online testing vulnerabilities
Remote assessment is now emerging as perhaps the biggest battleground.
Online testing is cheaper, more scalable and logistically easier to organise than in physical exam centres. But investigators fear it is dramatically harder to secure.
Some providers actively market online assessments as faster and more convenient alternatives to in-person testing.
TKS Training advertises an online health and safety course for CSCS green cards that can supposedly be completed “in half the time”.
Fawcett says “alarm bells” ring whenever providers advertise 100 per cent pass rates, which some do.
“If you do not control the test environment, you cannot guarantee it’s secure,” he says.
Online communities on Reddit and Telegram openly share methods for bypassing remote proctoring systems, including defeating webcam monitoring and browser security tools.
Fawcett fears fully remote testing environments create ideal conditions for organised cheating operations. Criminal networks could simply charge candidates to take a test in their own facility, which is “staged” to look like a bedroom or office, and where they can be assisted without detection.
But James Gupta, CEO of online exam platform Synap, points out that the “new opportunities for misconduct” created by generative AI and digital tools are “not exclusive to online exams”.
He says: “AI now challenges coursework, take-home assessments and even traditional classroom testing, which means the conversation needs to focus on assessment design and integrity rather than simply blaming the delivery format.”
The issue has become politically sensitive because of the Home Office’s plans to move English-language testing for visa applicants fully online from 2027 under a contract reportedly worth £816 million. The UK would become one of the first countries to make these tests fully remote. Australia banned fully remote visa English testing last year.
The International English Language Testing System (IELTS) consortium, which oversees two-thirds of the current in-person English tests, withdrew from the procurement process, warning the proposals would create “new and significant security vulnerabilities”.
Migration minister Mike Tapp is aware of the risks; he recently said suppliers would need to demonstrate robust anti-cheating protections against threats, including AI and wearable devices.
But Chapman fears the move could normalise weaker standards across other sectors.
“Other organisations will follow,” he says. “The Home Office providers will probably spend a lot of money trying to make it secure. Other providers won’t.”
Cheating used to leave clues. Today’s students have access to an unregulated marketplace of invisible gadgets.
The challenge facing colleges, awarding organisations and regulators is no longer simply catching individual cheats.
It is confronting a rapidly growing and unregulated global market, powered by AI, social media and consumer electronics, that is increasingly making dishonesty in assessment feel normal.