The CSO is saying that from his point of view he needs to defend against the attacks whatever the reason for them. So to him the reason doesn't matter.

Yeah that makes sense, but I'm not sure how it contradicts the article. It seems additive rather than contradictory.

He, running a healthcare company and not an AI lab, cannot depend on every AI lab, worldwide, being perfect in their sandboxing for all time forever. He's got to defend against it as if at least some of the time, at least some of the labs are going to be incompetent and let this kind of thing out.

That does not make ActionHank completely wrong. This shouldn't take rocket science on the part of the labs. It just takes competence and willingness. But at least some labs have shown that they are missing that at least some of the time, so the CSO is correct in terms of what the CSO's stance needs to be.