If this be naïvete, then I'll happily wear that label, and wear it proudly. I've been around enough to have a good sense of the value you create when you make an effort to consider other people's interests, and that seemed absent in the original post. I disagree that this is naïve, however. I've worked with far too many talented people who think the same way to chalk this thinking up to inexperience or simplicity.
That they are a for-profit company is completely irrelevant, as is whether or not they have a bug bounty program. Legal abstractions aside, it's still just people on both sides.
The expectation isn't that the poster work for free. The poster could have easily obscured identifying details and the content of his article would not be diminished. It is my opinion that if he wanted to "show his work", work done of his own initiative, then I think it would be more interesting and useful to include something about attempting to assist in remediation. I think, as mentioned by others, it would make a far stronger argument to click that "hire me!" button than anything in his technical analysis.
Of course automated systems are on the hunt for this stuff. Same with public code repositories, Docker images, and if you operate a subscription-based service with any popularity then your web interfaces for sign-up, login, etc will be subject to well-orchestrated brute force attacks. That someone did a poor job is all the more reason to avoid potentially contributing to their exploitation.
A response within the positive spectrum is absolutely above and beyond. Of all the feedback this community can provide, I think this is the most useful and I'm grateful that the poster has been responsive to it.
