CBSE News Live Updates: CBSE re-evaluation portal still inaccessible as students await post-result services

CBSE’s OSM controversy: A timeline of glitches, answer-sheet disputes and fresh data exposure claims
The Central Board of Secondary Education’s transition to the On Screen Marking (OSM) system for Class 12 board examinations has remained under scrutiny since the declaration of results, with a series of complaints, technical issues and security-related allegations emerging over the past few weeks.

What began as student complaints regarding answer sheets has gradually expanded into a wider controversy involving evaluation processes, portal functionality, cybersecurity concerns and demands for greater transparency in post-result services.

Complaints emerge after answer sheets become accessible
The first major concerns surfaced when students began accessing scanned copies of their evaluated answer books through the post-result process. Several students reported that scanned answer sheets appeared blurred or incomplete. Some candidates alleged that supplementary sheets were missing, while others claimed that pages were not visible in the copies made available to them.

The controversy intensified after a student alleged that the answer sheet uploaded under his credentials did not match his handwriting. CBSE later stated that the correct answer book had subsequently been provided to the student.

Alongside these concerns, students and parents also reported difficulties accessing scanned answer books through the digital platform.

Questions raised over OSM implementation
The OSM system was introduced this year for Class 12 evaluation, replacing conventional paper-based assessment workflows with digital evaluation of scanned answer books.

During the controversy, several teachers involved in evaluation stated that they had encountered issues such as blurry scans, page-loading problems and difficulties while assessing lengthy descriptive responses on screen.

Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan later acknowledged that discrepancies had been reported and stated that corrective measures would be taken wherever required. He also said the government would ensure that student grievances were addressed.

According to the minister, around 17 lakh students appeared for the examinations, involving nearly 98 lakh answer books and approximately 40 crore scanned pages.

IIT experts and government agencies brought in
As concerns around the digital infrastructure grew, CBSE stated that experts from IIT Kanpur and IIT Madras had been associated with reviewing and strengthening the technology framework linked to the evaluation ecosystem.

The Board also maintained that all genuine complaints were being examined and that students would have access to post-result remedies through verification and re-evaluation processes.

Fresh cybersecurity allegations surface
The controversy entered a new phase after software developers and ethical hackers publicly alleged vulnerabilities within CBSE-linked digital infrastructure.

Android developer Sidharth claimed on X that multiple OnMark portals contained security weaknesses, including default passwords and other vulnerabilities. Separately, software engineer Nisarga Adhikary alleged that a CBSE-linked AWS storage bucket had been configured in a manner that allowed public access to scanned answer sheets and question papers.

In another post, Adhikary claimed that “another live CBSE prod portal” had been compromised and that a significant amount of personally identifiable information had been exposed. He stated that CERT-In and CBSE had been informed about the alleged vulnerability.

CBSE subsequently said that vulnerabilities detected in systems operated by its service provider had been contained and that cybersecurity specialists from government agencies and IITs had been deployed to strengthen security measures. However, the Board did not specifically address the AWS-related allegations cited by activists and developers.

The developments have added another layer to an issue that initially began with evaluation-related concerns and has since expanded into a broader debate around digital examination infrastructure.