This is a research prototype. The data and analyses are preliminary and not yet validated — we'd welcome your .
During Vietnam's 2025 national high school graduation exams, multiple students were caught using mobile phones and high-tech devices to transmit exam questions to external accomplices. These accomplices used AI tools, specifically ChatGPT, StudyX, and Gemini, to generate answers which were then relayed back to the students. The incidents, occurring in Hanoi and Lam Dong, have triggered police investigations into the disclosure of classified exam materials and resulted in student disqualifications.
Multiple students in Vietnam reportedly used generative AI tools including ChatGPT, StudyX, and Gemini to cheat during the national high school graduation exams on June 26–27, 2025. Incidents reportedly included smuggling phones and cameras into exam rooms, transmitting questions outside in real time, and receiving purportedly AI-generated answers. Students were caught at multiple centers in Lam Dong and Hanoi. Authorities are investigating the breaches and related information leaks.
Domain classification, causal taxonomy, severity scores, and national security assessments were LLM-classified and may contain errors.
Using AI systems to gain a personal advantage over others such as through cheating, fraud, scams, blackmail or targeted manipulation of beliefs or behavior. Examples include AI-facilitated plagiarism for research or education, impersonating a trusted or fake individual for illegitimate financial benefit, or creating humiliating or sexual imagery.
The students used AI applications to cheat on high-stakes national exams, which constitutes using AI to gain an unfair personal advantage through cheating.
Human
Due to a decision or action made by humans
Intentional
Due to an expected outcome from pursuing a goal
Post-deployment
Occurring after the AI model has been trained and deployed
The cheating was initiated by the intentional actions of human students using deployed AI systems to gain an unfair advantage.
During Vietnam's 2025 national exams, students used AI tools like ChatGPT and Gemini to cheat, prompting police investigations into the leak of classified exam materials. While the incident disrupted a major government-run educational process and caused public concern, its national security impact remains minor and manageable within standard law enforcement and administrative procedures.
The AI systems (ChatGPT, StudyX, Gemini) acted as assistants, providing answers to the exam questions uploaded by the students or their accomplices, thereby augmenting their capabilities rather than taking independent action.
Limited Risk: The AI systems used (ChatGPT, Gemini) are general-purpose chatbots, which fall under the Limited Risk category requiring transparency.
The AI systems were used to answer exam questions in Literature, Math, Chemistry, Physics, History, and English.
The reports clearly detail the cheating incidents, the specific AI tools used (ChatGPT, StudyX, Gemini), the methods of transmission, and the consequences for the students. There is little ambiguity regarding the facts of the cheating.
None
Technology
AI-Powered Question Solving Apps
Apps like ChatGPT and Gemini allow quick generation of exam answers.
Miniaturized Streaming Hardware
Button-sized cameras and tiny earphones enable covert data transmission.
Accessible Mobile AI Interfaces
Easy-to-use mobile apps make real-time cheating highly accessible.
Data Inputs
Captured Exam Paper Images
High-resolution photos of test papers provided clear input for AI solvers.
Text-Based Exam Questions
Standardized questions are easily parsed and solved by large language models.
Real-Time Video Streams
Live streams of exam sheets allowed external helpers to feed data into AI.
Human Factors
Academic Pressure on Students
High-stakes university entrance exams drive students to use illicit aids.
Negligent Exam Proctors
Proctors failed to detect smuggled phones and high-tech streaming gear.
Collaborator Assistance
External accomplices facilitated the input of questions into AI systems.
Process and Methods
Weak Candidate Screening
Lack of physical searches allowed students to smuggle devices into rooms.
Inadequate Proctor Supervision
Proctors failed to monitor students actively, allowing photo taking.
No Signal Jamming in Exam Centers
Absence of signal blockers enabled real-time internet communication.
Management
Insufficient Exam Security Planning
Organizers failed to anticipate high-tech AI cheating methods.
Inadequate Proctor Training
Staff were not trained to identify modern electronic cheating devices.
Lack of Incident Response Protocol
A student was caught but not suspended immediately, allowing repeat offenses.
Regulatory Environment
Unregulated Online Device Sales
Spy cameras and earpieces are easily purchased on social media platforms.
Lack of AI Abuse Frameworks
No specific regulations exist targeting AI-assisted academic dishonesty.
AI system involved
Identified by automated extraction; can differ from the alleged developers above.
