There have been so very few details released, but this would be a very liberal interpretation of the presented facts from Marles and Albo today.

I've seen nothing (yet) to suggest this wasn't simply publicly accessible files without public-facing links, and that the agents found them the same way people have been doing for years in these situations -- by guessing the filenames. That would fit with both what we know OAI agents were doing around the same time with other sites, and with Marles and Albo stressing that this was minor.

> OpenAI admits the material included aggregate health statistics and internal filenames

This would not be contrary to the above hypothesis.

> Services Australia says the agent wrote files to an internal server while doing this, which is believed to be how the incursion was discovered.

Well, no -- the "incursion" was only discovered after OAI sent an email to the Services Australia email address (and even then only after the email was noticed, a few days after that). Albo also made it very clear that he was ignorant of any of this when meeting Altman a few weeks ago.

I could be wrong about the severity. One of the frustrating things about all of this is that there's no details as to the extraction method or even precisely what data was obtained. I'm hoping that OAI will eventually release details about this in their "Agents behaving badly" series, and we'll get to the bottom of it.

But I doubt that the Australian Government is blameless here. They obviously didn't properly protect files that they wanted protected -- and it really annoys me that there are no questions being asked about this at all, currently.