I admit that it could look that way, but I think the reality is that Linus is being blatantly pragmatic.
The harm caused by the patch is not technical, and may even be purely theoretical, it is hard to measure.
The benefit of the patch is that it makes it easier and safer for someone out there to use Linux, and that is a genuine positive.
The only real negative is that it seems that Ted slipped the patch in "under the radar", arguably misusing his status as a maintainer. They might hurt his reputation a little, but that isn't Linus' problem, and Ted has a very strong reputation so I don't think a little hurt will make a big dent.
You might argue that there is a risk that other maintainers might think that Ted got away with something and might try the same thing. I agree that is possible but I suspect it is fairly unlikely and I very much doubt they would get away with it.
But Linus' pragmatic approach is a lot more about solving problems that are, not solving problems that might be, and his decision is consistent with that approach.