> The system is broken
This is truer than it sounds. The very design of Examinations itself is broken in most places. It shouldn't be possible by design to cheat in my opinion.
"Open-book" exams are harder to set, but I think the whole cheating-prevention infrastructure is harder, costlier, and pointless.
It is definitely possible to design assessments on which cheating is difficult. For example, oral examinations or personalized per-student projects or exams. The problem is that this style of personalized assessment fundamentally does not scale past a few dozen students in a classroom.
You want a classroom that small, it's going to cost you. Just instructor salaries for would run each student 10-30k per year, and that's before paying for infrastructure (classrooms, tech, offices) and (admittedly not always useful) administration.
Of course, yes, nothing's perfect. But Open book exams are far better bargain than what the most popular method of exams is as of today.
Cheating was solved with a pretty straightforward approach: don't make it trivial to cheat (re-using test questions, question-bank multiple choice tests, etc) to keep the honest students honest, then trust the students. If someone's caught violating that trust, send them to the business school. (I don't know what they did with cheaters in the business school. I assume promote them)