This article details a new piece of information, and the headline reflects that.
Customer configuration is an irrelevant detail that should have been left out until a full RCA. What does it matter that it was valid? So an invalid configuration would have meant it was indeed the _customer's_ fault??
A more fair treatment would have been, "a customer pentested us and won".
Unless it's an edge use case you're not supporting, don't sell me your cost avoidance on any production systems.
I don't know any dev that would agree with "passing them off as rare to avoid dealing with them" - rather, "it's a low priority, but it needs fixing" or "ok, this is an edge case, but holy crap its a bad one"
The way I read it, they were trying to communicate the fact that a customer fiddling with their own configuration brought down large swathes of the internet for everybody else. That absolutely deserves to be in the headline.
Which is why it's clickbait. Sensational title, humdrum article.