Some of the links in this article are "affiliate links", a link with a special tracking code. This means if you click on an affiliate link and purchase the item, we will receive an affiliate commission.
The price of the item is the same whether it is an affiliate link or not. Regardless, we only recommend products or services we believe will add value to our readers.
By using the affiliate links, you are helping support our Website, and we genuinely appreciate your support.
[matched_title]
AI is helping people in different ways. It is also “helping” software developers and engineers, apparently, not just in their work but also in cheating their way through an SDE job interview. So widespread seems to be the problem that big tech companies, including Google, are now moving away from virtual interviews to in-person job interviews, because in-person it is more difficult for candidates to use something like Cluely while answering questions.
AI, in a way, has opened doors to new ways of cheating. Candidates these days are no longer just searching the web for answers in another tab; they are using sophisticated AI tools to generate live responses, solve coding questions in real time, and even manipulate their voice or appearance. This has left some of the biggest tech companies, including Google, Amazon and Cisco, rethinking their hiring process. Google, for example, has confirmed it will bring back in-person interviews for certain roles, as executives say virtual hiring has become harder to trust in the age of AI.
One of the tools that has brought the issue of AI cheating into the spotlight is Cluely. It was created by Chungin “Roy” Lee, a Columbia University student who was later expelled from his college over the controversy. Cluely was originally designed to help users cheat in coding interviews by generating answers and prompts in real time, but Lee later expanded its scope, calling it “cheating for literally everything.”
In interviews, Lee has argued that what’s seen today as cheating will eventually become standard practice, stating, “We say ‘cheat on everything’ because, ironically, we believe this is the only path towards a future that is truly fair.” Of course, his views have divided opinions and have raised questions about whether AI assistance in hiring is unavoidable or a dangerous shortcut.
Cluely vs Truly
In response, some other students at Columbia University developed an anti-cheating tool called Truly. Unlike Cluely, Truly was built to detect and prevent AI-assisted behaviour during virtual interviews. It works by monitoring inputs such as browser activity, microphones, and screen access during a session, generating a score to flag suspicious behaviour. Its creators say the idea is not to accuse candidates automatically but to promote transparency in recruitment, offering companies a way to balance fairness against the growing use of AI in interviews.
So how do candidates cheat?
One part of cheating involves live interview assistants. Tools like Final Round AI or Interview Sidekick can listen to the interviewer’s questions, transcribe them instantly, and generate answers tailored to the job description and CV. Candidates simply read them back as though they had thought of them on the spot. Others rely on hidden screens or secondary devices showing prompts and answers just outside the camera’s view. More discreetly, candidates may paste interview questions into generative AI chatbots such as ChatGPT or Gemini to get ready-made replies. Recruiters often pick up on this when they notice unnatural pauses or sudden tab-switching.
When it comes to technical roles, AI cheating takes a different form. There are bots built specifically for coding assessments that can quietly generate solutions while staying undetected on screen-share platforms. Even mainstream developer tools like GitHub Copilot, Amazon Q Developer, or Google’s Vertex AI can be misused during live tests, providing instant code snippets that candidates present as their own. To a recruiter, it may look like quick problem-solving, but in reality, it can be AI doing the heavy lifting.
The methods don’t stop at text and code. Some candidates use deepfake-style overlays to make it seem like they are speaking in real time, even when the video or audio is pre-recorded. Voice modification software such as Voicemod allows people to sound more fluent or confident than they naturally are. In extreme cases, “proxy interviews” involve someone else entirely taking the interview with the help of AI-generated video and audio tricks.
In favour and against
With these practices spreading, social media has been buzzing with opinions. One user on X wrote, “Cheating in tech interviews is exploding. Why? Because most interviews are still virtual, and the job market is brutal that candidates are starting to resort to any means necessary.”
Others, however, argue it’s just the natural use of tools. Another user compared it to the calculator debate decades ago, saying, “An answer is an answer. You required information. I provided it. The means is irrelevant.”
On the other hand, some candidates welcome the push back to face-to-face formats. One user put it simply, “Makes total sense! The AI cheating has gotten so sophisticated that remote interviews lost their integrity. Face-to-face reveals true problem-solving skills and authentic communication.”
Big tech leaders are also weighing in on the situation. Google employees themselves raised the issue earlier this year in February, during an internal town hall.
Brian Ong, Google’s Vice President of Recruiting, admitted that while online interviews were faster, “we definitely have more work to do to integrate how AI is now more prevalent in the interview process.”
CEO Sundar Pichai backed this up, saying on the Lex Fridman podcast earlier this year in June, “Given we all work hybrid, I think it’s worth thinking about some fraction of the interviews being in person. I think it’ll help both the candidates understand Google’s culture and I think it’s good for both sides.” He confirmed that at least one in-person round will now be required for roles involving coding.
Other major companies are also taking similar steps. Amazon asks candidates to formally confirm they will not use AI tools during interviews. Anthropic has banned the use of AI in its hiring. Deloitte and McKinsey have gone back to in-person sessions for some positions, and Cisco has reinstated onsite rounds for technical roles.
AI has changed the way job interviews work. For candidates, it may seem like an easier way to handle tough interviews. For recruiters, it has become harder to tell whether answers are coming from the person or from an AI tool. This dilemma is pushing companies to rethink how they conduct interviews and what a fair hiring process should look like today.
– Ends
BBM JOB
