Cluely’s rise has turned a simple product claim into a broader fight over AI cheating, detection software, and where the next workaround may come from. The startup went viral last week by presenting a hidden in-browser window as “undetectable” and useful to “cheat on everything” from job interviews to exams.
That message has already drawn a response. Startups are now promoting tools they say can identify Cluely use, while Cluely’s co-founder and CEO, Chungin “Roy” Lee, is arguing that the next phase may move beyond software entirely.
The product claim that triggered the response
Cluely’s pitch centered on concealment. Its hidden in-browser window was presented as a way to use AI assistance without being noticed during high-stakes online situations, including job interviews and exams.
The controversy is not only about whether one tool can be detected. It is about the incentives behind building AI products that position themselves around evasion. A product that markets itself as “undetectable” immediately creates pressure for others to prove the opposite.
That is what appears to be happening now. Validia, a San Francisco-based startup, launched a free product called “Truely” last week in direct response to Cluely. Validia says the software triggers an alarm if it detects someone using Cluely.
Rhode Island-based startup Proctaroo is making a similar claim. Its platform can detect Cluely users, the company says, because it can observe activity beyond what a user may intend to show.
“When a Proctaroo session is active, we can see running applications and ‘hidden’ background processes — Cluely is no different,” CEO Adrian Aamodt told TechCrunch, criticizing Cluely’s business model as “unethical.”
Why detection startups see an opening
The emergence of Truely and Proctaroo’s claim shows how fast a countermarket can form around a viral AI tool. Cluely’s visibility created an obvious target: if users are being told a tool is hidden, institutions and platforms may want software that says it can uncover that hiding.
Validia’s response is direct in both name and timing. “Truely” is being positioned as a free product built in response to Cluely, with a narrow promise: detect Cluely use and trigger an alarm.
Proctaroo is taking a broader platform-based position. According to Aamodt, when a Proctaroo session is active, it can see running applications and background processes. In that framing, Cluely is not a special case. It is another running process that the platform says it can identify.
The core issue is trust. If an interview, exam, meeting, or sales call depends on knowing who is doing the work, hidden AI assistance changes the assumptions of the interaction. Detection tools are being offered as a way to restore those assumptions, or at least to warn when they may be broken.
Cluely says software defenses may not matter
Lee has dismissed the anti-cheating tools promoted by these startups as pointless. He compared the effort to years of failed cheating crackdowns in the video game industry, arguing that detection software may not be able to settle the problem.
His more important claim is that Cluely may move into hardware. If AI assistance no longer sits inside a browser window or a visible software process, software-based anti-cheating tools could become less useful.
Lee named several possible directions for that future:
- smart glasses
- a transparent glass screen overlay
- a recording necklace
- even a brain chip
“Whether it’s smart glasses, a transparent glass screen overlay, a recording necklace, or even a brain chip, we’re not sure,” he said.
Lee also described expanding into hardware as “quite trivial technologically,” even though the source article notes high-profile AI hardware failures like Humane’s AI Pin. The point is not that Cluely has announced one specific device. The point is that its CEO is presenting hardware as a plausible path around anti-cheating software.
The messaging has already shifted
Scrutiny of Cluely’s business model appears to have changed how the company presents itself. Cluely has scrubbed references to cheating on exams and job interviews from its website and manifesto, even though those references had been a major original selling point.
The company now says its “cheating” message applies to areas such as sales calls and meetings. That is a meaningful shift in framing. Exams and job interviews carry a direct association with assessment and qualification, while sales calls and meetings place the product closer to workplace assistance.
Lee told TechCrunch that Cluely is “redefining” its messaging to target the “largest and most impactful markets.”
“Ultimately, we see a future where everyone uses AI to its utmost potential, and that means planting in large, specific markets, and expanding out from there,” he said.
That explanation keeps the company’s broader AI ambition intact while moving away from some of the most inflammatory examples. It also suggests that the fight over Cluely may not stay limited to schools, interviews, or proctored environments.
What the Cluely fight signals
The conflict around Cluely is a preview of a wider pattern. AI tools that promise hidden assistance will likely create demand for products that claim to reveal them. Each side then has an incentive to move quickly: one toward concealment, the other toward detection.
For now, the dispute is still centered on software. Validia says Truely can trigger an alarm. Proctaroo says its platform can see hidden background processes. Cluely says that kind of defense is ultimately limited, especially if assistance moves into hardware.
The result is not a settled answer but a clearer set of stakes. If AI assistance becomes easier to hide, then online interviews, exams, sales calls, and meetings all face new questions about disclosure, fairness, and verification. Cluely made that debate visible by claiming its tool was “undetectable.” The response from Validia and Proctaroo shows that other startups are now trying to prove that claim wrong.