Accused of Cheating by an Algorithm, and a Professor She Had Never Met
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
And a bit more abstractly, they are trying to temporarily establish control over a space, so that their ml vodoo can flag suspicious behavior. A poster is actually a nice example, that they have problems with teenagers having a poster of their favorite pop star in their bedroom is an obvious, but there are probably also posters that get identified as a person with a probability of 10^-3 or so and subsequently flagged as another person entered the room during the exam. That situation is not improved by them not controlling the lighting of the room.
And of course, a institution paying a company to judge students is a recipe to ignore the students interests. We can assume that everybody involved thinks that minimizing false positives is important, in the abstract, however concretely this software is sold with a nice presentation to administrators and a nice UI for professors, minimizing the hoops students have to jump through, or their privacy, is not an immediate pain point for either.
Saying that's not an accusation and it's the people in the loop who accuse is just weaselling. People will just do what the algorithms tell them, they don't want to make their own judgements for fear of getting it wrong and treat the computer as gospel.