Now I know what you're thinking... "oh no. hes being racist again"
however, if you would so kindly look at any recent standings, especially ones which favour the timezone of indians... (like the last div1,div2 combined round...), you would notice quite the coincidence. And if you think, oh well Codeforces is fucked... you would be wrong Codeforces gets the short end of it, just look at meta hacker cup round 3, and compare it to any other year.
Now is calling out Indians racist? Without valid reasoning that they are the supermajority causing issues, yes. However, I believe I have valid enough reasoning. If the pure statistics don't convince you that we must target punishments towards India/bangladesh/pakistan?/basically that geographic region, then why not use logic instead?
Why do these people want to cheat? Well I've asked a few who obviously, I will keep anonymous. Simply put, its peer pressure. Somehow, most likely due to government corruption and other political things I will not get into, Indian students believe it is ok to cheat as long as they get good results for a job eventually. Because their peers all cheat, they also feel compelled to cheat. Now obviously this is a fundamental flaw widespread in only india, pakistan, and similar regions.
Overall, it seems the majority of cheaters are Indian, and due to the difficulty for online proctoring or other completely fair solutions, I believe banning Indian (and similar) based off the area code on their phone numbers by default will have great contribution both for academic integrity, and the CF infrastructure. What do I mean by default? Well we cant ban everyone, that would be unfair for the actual high level Indians who do not cheat. Due to these being so incredibly rare, we can have non Indians vouch for them. If they are still caught cheating both the non Indian and Indian are banned.
Actually by using a phone number when registering (luogu does this btw) you can prevent alt accounts as well. Its a win-win if you think about it. Or maybe, we can allow registering of accounts, but they have submission limits, and cannot participate in contests without phone number verification.
The submission limits should help reduce the long queues, and by using phone numbers, botnets would be impossible. While banning Indians seems racist, unfortunately It would be the most realistic and simplest solution that would largely fix the problems on this platform currently.
Finally: on the topic of mass downvoting this blog. Sure go ahead, especially to the cheaters and Indians who don't want such changes to take effect, in fact I have a message for you. Unlike you, I really don't care if one online number goes down, mass downvote me all you want, I really couldn't care less, I'm just trying to propose a feasible and realistic solution.
Auto comment: topic has been updated by mambo (previous revision, new revision, compare).
I agree phone number login or mandatory binding phone with otp verification for indian is actually better solution. & no surprise cheaters are downvoting this post.
How innocent ur.. this person clearly is a racist guy who hate all indians yet ur talking so calming...just look the fker's bio this losr's just jealous of dominater and people like him bc they're better
Wow, jealous of dominater? No nothing like that, I do this for fun either ways.
However if you think im still being racist please show me evidence that disproves each of my statements.
the current #4 and #6 highest rated indians are known cheaters.
over 200 indians made it to meta hacker cup round 3, when less than 30 do in prior years.
cheating peaks during contests +12 hours — +15 hours offset compared to normal contests, and decreases during contests +3-+6 hours offset compared to normal contests.
Additionally, I don't hate Indians for them being Indians. Its due to the mislead Indian culture who thinks cheating is fine as long as it gets them jobs in SWE (it doesn't).
This toxic culture is what I dislike, not the Indian people. None of my statements have been inheritably racist towards Indians, rather pointing out common flaws in their society.
Additionally, explain the wall. I don't have screenshots of it anymore but I'm sure I have some saved somewhere, Ill update this message with that if I can find it.
"fuck india" sure u don't hate the indians..and I even want cf to implement this phone verification thing but why specifically target one country okk I understand u see most cheaters are indians but r u really not smart enough to understand that its bc Indians have the most population even on cf the highest no. of people using cf are indians..are u really not smart enough to understand even this simple thing??Even this chinese guy mapmc is a cheater too and many chinese cheat too bc their population on cf is high too but since ur racist u won't notice them
your argument quickly falls apart if you compare it to another (equally high population) country
There are very few cases of Chinese cheaters, yet we hear about Indian cheaters almost every day. Both in cf, and these other larger competitions I've mentioned in the blog. Both have high populations and high presence in CP, yet one, by proportion, cheats significantly more than the other (which cheats very little, to the extent of it being negligible).
Also the queue and botnets were all by Indians, never by any other people. Additionally, according to the cheater database, the cheater database got DDoSed by someone in Mumbai, India.
This overwhelming evidence shows its not merely a case of population. Additionally, if I were to put in the effort I could make a graph of number of cheaters from country based on cheater DB / number of participants from country. However I feel no need to do that right now as there is overwhelming evidence already.
(oh I see you edited it to include Chinese), sure there are sparse cases out there. However, even though both populations are high, which country do you think has more cheaters? India by far.
Why not ban all cheaters??Why country specific??Why don't u want cheaters from ur country to get banned??
I appreciate the initiative and I support the goal, but I believe the current plan regarding phone verification is flawed.
1. The Flaw with Phone Verification Restricting numbers (e.g., requiring USA numbers) is no big deal for many people; it is trivial to obtain virtual numbers to bypass this. I guarantee you that people will find workarounds to sign up almost immediately. We need a more robust solution.
2. Alternative A: Validated Offline Baselines A better approach would require institutional support:
3. Alternative B: Grouped Leaderboards (The Ideal Solution) The best plan, in my opinion, is a Grouped Leaderboard concept:
I think the problem is that competitive programming is popular now mainly due to many companies using leetcode-esque problems in their interview process. So a lot of people who do competitive programming don't do it because it is enjoyable to them — they do it because it might help them in getting a job later. And since their goal is just to get a job (and not to get better at the skill) they are way more likely to cheat than people who just do it for the hell of it, because they actually don't respect the skill or the site at all. It's just a barrier to them. So if we somehow convince the big companies to not care about leetcode problem solving skills, the problem will be solved, and most of the Indian cheaters will go away.
How cheating on a cf round would help you with solving a leetcode problem during your interview? If they only want to get a job, shouldn't they learn how to sneakily use llm during interview or something like that? Don't tell me that in India interviewers ask for your cf rating xddd
I get the impression that they (the companies) do, since all these cheaters are always flexing their ratings on linkedin. Like if there is an Indian cheater exposed post, $$$60\%$$$ of the time the cheater posted their 'achievement' on linkedin.
ooooh, that makes sense now
I don't think that banning everyone from these countries will be fair to people who actually want to get better at Competitive Programming. Cheaters are bad but there must be a way to identify exactly who is cheating. And your idea to ban phone numbers is also stupid. A better idea will be to monitor people with unusual rating changes etc. Also you say you are not racist but you do sound a-lot like you are,how do you know that people from other areas don't cheat? You don't. You are stupid if you think banning these specific countries is the solution.
Your solution is indeed very realistic and practical and I suggest it be implemented throughout the next few months on Codeforces.
Cheating in online contests isn’t just a problem—it’s a full-on challenge to the system, the rules, and anyone trying to maintain sanity. Bots, alt accounts, last-minute copy-paste attempts—they all exist because humans are creative, impatient, and sometimes spectacularly reckless. Phone verification and submission limits slow the obvious offenders, but there’s so much more a system could do if it wanted to punish cheaters in style.
For the honest players, rewards can be absurdly ambitious. Imagine submitting perfectly for a single contest and unlocking a special leaderboard badge that triggers a subtle, celebratory animation every time someone views your profile. Maintain a perfect streak across an entire year and you could receive priority access to contests, beta features, and exclusive challenges that no one else can touch. Keep it up for a decade? Your account could earn a permanent featured status, with all future newcomers automatically seeing your profile as an example of “ideal participation.” Wild, unattainable—but plausible.
Cheaters, meanwhile, deserve consequences that sting… without breaking reality. Minor infractions could result in temporary submission freezes, where your account can log in but cannot submit anything for a fixed period. The system might require you to pass an additional mini-contest designed to force you to solve tricky problems under observation before you regain full access. Repeat offenders could see all their submissions labeled publicly as “under review” for the next contest, with leaderboard visibility downgraded. It’s humiliating, noticeable to peers, and forces accountability—yet it’s technically feasible.
More serious cheating could trigger tiered access restrictions: locked contest divisions, removal of virtual rewards, or temporary bans from participating in ranked contests. The system could also require cheaters to complete an “honesty verification”, like attending a short online session where they review best practices for fair play. It’s uncomfortable, time-consuming, and embarrassing, but fully enforceable.
Community involvement can also play a role. Experienced participants might be required to vouch for newcomers or monitor peer submissions for fairness, with clear rewards or recognition for successful oversight. Failure to vouch responsibly could lead to minor leaderboard demotions or temporary restrictions—a realistic but still absurdly dramatic consequence that forces mentors to actually care.
Ultimately, cheating might never disappear entirely. But a combination of extreme rewards for flawless behavior and consequences that are inconvenient, visible, and psychologically awkward—all entirely achievable within the platform’s ecosystem—creates a system that is both fair and chaotic. Every submission becomes a story: an opportunity for glory, or a lesson in humiliation. And honestly, that tension is part of what makes contests worth watching—and worth participating in.
For serious cheaters, digital consequences are fun, but why stop there? Let’s take things into the real world—because if cheating has consequences, why should they stay online? Minor offenders might be required to spend a full afternoon folding laundry for a neighbor or walk someone else’s dog in complete silence, reflecting on the moral weight of shortcuts. Repeat offenders? They could be assigned public leaf-raking duties at the local park, ideally while wearing a fluorescent vest and being observed by passersby. Humiliation and physical labor in equal measure.
More dramatic measures could include:
Mandatory cooking challenges: the cheater must prepare and deliver cookies or sandwiches for a group of strangers—perfectly executed, or face having to redo the entire batch.
Library reading sessions: spend a full Saturday reading obscure or incredibly dull encyclopedias aloud in a public space, complete with small applause for each page turned.
Extreme gardening punishments: planting and maintaining a small flowerbed in a public area until it fully blooms, every step documented with photos.
Household chores under supervision: cleaning, organizing, and minor repairs in someone else’s home while narrating their past mistakes to an imaginary audience.
The principle is simple: make the punishment absurd, inconvenient, and slightly mortifying, without ever touching anyone’s identity or culture. Cheating becomes a chain of bizarre, mildly humiliating real-life obligations, while honest behavior earns digital glory and impossible recognition. Every misstep leaves a mark—not just online, but tangibly in the world—turning contests into a chaotic blend of performance, consequence, and spectacle.