Yes, your argument sounds reasonable, if you have never been briefed on how to handle classified information. There is NO context that any leaking of any information is ever allowed. If it was deemed mission essential that the information be disseminated, she should have talked with the FSO to properly release the information in question.
Now, did she do something criminal, that is a fair question. Violating a national security policy is typically grounds for dismissal, with some folks let go after walking into a facility with their cell phone too many times. But Clinton is in a special class of people, along with a national security advisor that was caught sneaking documents out in their pants https://fas.org/irp/congress/2... . Typically those people make an oops, and slowly fade into history. The difference is that Mrs. Clinton is not fading, and is attempting to gain access to even more classified information, which she has a proven track record of mishandling in the interest of personal expediency.
If anything, this story shows that Clinton was willingly deteriorating departmental security measures to maintain her ability to control her professional communications. Regardless of the why (Bug, Misconfiguration, contractor incompetence), she valued personal protection over protection of her agency. And this is the basic argument that I have against her current run. Every time she has been "tested," she consistently comes out dirty, but not "legally" responsible.