I don't particularly like the idea of harassing possibly innocent students. Innocent students might be under pressure with no proof of innocence, since they assumed to be guilty. They might do a cost/benefit analysis and admit guilt. Also if cheating is really such a concern, why not just handle it in a similar way to the american GRE's or SAT's ?
When you suggest handling it like American GREs and SATs, what do you mean? Do you mean computer-given multiple choice tests? Or is there something about how they handle paper and pencil exams that you think should be widely adopted?
I think if academic integrity is huge issue, perhaps we should adopt some formal rules for all tests, rather than being at the whims of different professors, or universities.
Essentially we need some kind of check and balance before we try to discredit students on a metric like the one being described this article.
The GRE's as a specific example have a high degree of trust and a fairly proven track record for being secure and preventing cheating. It might not be that much of stretch to apply whatever they seem to be doing to combat academic integrity issues.
I think I rambled a bit, but I hope that made sense