At least they’re being honest up front. but yes it does show a naivety and inexperience of basic security.
Computer security is hard enough without loaded footguns like these lying around.
Defaults are often insecure but maximise interoperability or general usability. Look at Windows !
The defaults should be secure with explicit unlock steps for those that know their environment well enough that they can explicitly relax some restrictions.
Such drastic changes to the security model should only be one after explicit instruction.
The number of companies that operate without access controls between servers on the same segment is unfortunately quite large, database security controls are - again - more often than not left at their default setting and those too are quite often insecure.
Defense in depth always has limited depth, though I totally agree that running a database without access controls is not the way to go.
I appreciate your transparent account of the situation but what does it say about your company if your database got popped by a “script kiddie”?