Applicant Admissions of Prior Art

Here's a weird situation:

The Specification refers to an industry standard protocol as prior art and indicates this protocol as disclosing X. For example under a section clearly titled "Prior Art" - "ISO Standard ISO/IEC 27001:2022 describes a token key requirement having 256bit encryption..."

So this admitted prior art is used in a rejection, the Applicant then argues back: "The attorney has reviewed the referred to standard cited in the Specification and upon re-evaluation, the standard doesn't actually disclose X. Aw shucks, I think the original writer of the Specification interpreted the standard wrong." I look at the standards myself and agree with the attorney - I don't think the standard discloses X clearly enough.

So regardless of what the standard document says, is this still prior art? Usually once an applicant admit something is prior art, it sticks to them for life - even if the date is wrong and it's not really prior art (MPEP 2119). But I've never seen a situation where they admit to "something" that is prior art, but that "something" is a nothing burger.