saying that the required build system (that needs to be provided for the GPL) must include access to private servers, or authentication tokens used to publish the result to private servers is being silly at best.
That sort of access was never intended by any license writer (and any developer who thinks they are entitled to such access is foolish)
The problem is that the definition of what the "build system and scripts" are is a bit fuzzy. Many people who automate builds try to minimize all of their work, and this can include purely private things like what version control system the source is checked out of, or what version control system the resulting binaries are checked into. This sort of thing is of no interest to anyone except people trying to break into that company and disrupt it. The reason that the licenses specify "build scripts" is because sometimes logic gets put in there that affects the final binaries (things that arguably should be in the makefiles instead). In cases like this, the build scripts needed to duplicate the binaries from the source are different than the scripts that the company uses to do the builds that also do several other things.
This isn't bad faith or trying to violate the license on the part of the companies. It may be short sighted optimization of things by the admins writing the scripts, but no more than that.