Earlier quoted context omitted.
That seems like just victim blaming - "she was asking for it with the clothes she was wearing".
Software with vulnerabilities was defectively written. If someone makes tanks with paper for armour, because it cuts costs, they are to blame if those tanks catch fire.
It's fine to have this view that software should be defect free and hardened against sophisticated nation-state attackers, but it stretches the meaning of "defect" to me. A defect would be serving to fulfill that utility it had been designed for, not succumbing to malicious attackers.