@@ -282,6 +282,11 @@ The launcher streams image-build and provisioning output to the terminal. Import
 - `/sandbox/.openshell-agent/history.jsonl` contains the latest 100 supervisor transitions, including active-cycle starts and completed cycle results.
 - `openshell-agent: still running watch cycle ...` is a heartbeat during long active model cycles.
 - `review_feedback_lookup_failed` means Gator could not build the required cross-SHA feedback ledger and deliberately skipped a context-free review.
+- Security regressions introduced or newly exposed by an unmerged PR belong
+  in its normal review findings. Private follow-up under `SECURITY.md` is for
+  pre-existing vulnerabilities independent of the PR; security classification
+  alone is not a private-triage or test-dispatch gate. Gator must not initiate
+  external security reporting without explicit operator authorization.
 
 ### Inspect Active Sandboxes
 
 
@@ -99,6 +99,11 @@ When reviewing code or diffs:
 - Treat pre-existing security issues as private security follow-up, not public
   blockers on the current pull request. Treat other pre-existing defects as
   non-blocking follow-up work.
+- Surface security regressions introduced or newly exposed by an unmerged PR
+  in the normal PR review evidence contract. A new reachable path, trusted sink,
+  or security contract is PR-owned even when an underlying unsafe primitive
+  already existed. Security classification alone is not a private-triage gate.
+  Do not contact external reporting channels without operator authorization.
 - Keep docs, skill drift, diagnostic wording, and test-strength feedback
   advisory unless the published contract is materially false, the diagnostic
   creates an operational or safety failure, or missing coverage leaves a
 
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
 
 id: gator
-payload_version: 10
+payload_version: 12
 display_name: Gator Gate Agent
 description: Validate and monitor OpenShell GitHub issues and pull requests through the gator state machine.
 
 
@@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ rg -q 'COPY bin/validate-review-findings /usr/local/bin/validate-review-findings
   "$GATOR_DIR/Dockerfile"
 ruby -ryaml -e '
   manifest = YAML.load_file(ARGV.fetch(0))
-  abort unless manifest.fetch("payload_version") == 9
+   abort unless manifest.fetch("payload_version") == 12
   resource = manifest.fetch("resources").find {
     |entry| entry.fetch("id") == "gator-review-findings-schema"
   }
@@ -364,6 +364,14 @@ rg -q 'review-feedback-ledger NVIDIA OpenShell <pr-number>' \
 rg -q 'Every prior Gator finding is a durable review disposition' \
     "$GATOR_DIR/skills/gator-gate/SKILL.md"
 rg -q 'review feedback ledger' "$GATOR_DIR/prompts/gator.md"
+# Keep security routing consistent across the gate, top-level prompt, and
+# independent reviewer; PR-owned regressions must remain actionable reviews.
+rg -Fq 'PR in that PR' "$GATOR_DIR/skills/gator-gate/SKILL.md"
+rg -Fq 'private_security_review_required' "$GATOR_DIR/skills/gator-gate/SKILL.md"
+rg -Fq 'Do not initiate external disclosure' "$GATOR_DIR/skills/gator-gate/SKILL.md"
+rg -Fq 'not a generic private-security blocker' "$GATOR_DIR/prompts/gator.md"
+rg -Fq 'Security classification alone is not a private-triage gate' \
+    "$GATOR_DIR/../../../.claude/agents/principal-engineer-reviewer.md"
 rg -q '### Pragmatic review calibration' \
     "$GATOR_DIR/skills/gator-gate/SKILL.md"
 rg -q 'A new commit permits a delta review' \
 
@@ -34,6 +34,12 @@ Important sandbox constraints:
 - Use `gator:approval-needed` only when gator is complete but maintainer approval is still missing. Once maintainer approval is present and required checks remain green with no unresolved feedback, move to `gator:merge-ready` for the final merge or close decision.
 - Before running the `principal-engineer-reviewer` sub-agent or posting a review disposition, check existing gator comments and PR reviews for the current `headRefOid`. Do not run a reviewer or post another marked review/status disposition for a head SHA that already has one unless a maintainer explicitly requests a same-SHA public response, the PR is merged/closed and needs terminal cleanup, or the earlier attempt failed before posting. A prior marked comment that only says the reviewer sub-agent failed before producing output is a legacy infrastructure-failure report, not a valid review disposition; ignore it and retry the reviewer. A prior marked `## Blocked` comment whose only blocker was that the PR was draft is also not a valid code-review disposition after the PR becomes ready for review; ignore it for review suppression and run the reviewer once. Same-SHA CI changes, human replies, label changes, and reviewer comments must not create public status comments; record them only in the supervised result sentinel. A state-specific TTL nudge is the exception: after 48 business hours and no more often than once per 48 business hours for the same state and responsible actor, post the matching `## Author Follow-Up Nudge`, `## Maintainer Review Nudge`, `## Merge Decision Nudge`, or `## Blocker Follow-Up Nudge` template even when the head SHA is unchanged. A nudge must name the pending action, does not authorize a re-review, and does not consume or replace the one review disposition for that SHA.
 - When the gator skill requires the `principal-engineer-reviewer` sub-agent and the current effective patch has not already been reviewed by gator, first build the required review feedback ledger with `review-feedback-ledger`, then run a bounded independent review with `{{REVIEWER_COMMAND}}`. Treat the ledger's review mode, tree identity, patch identity, previous reviewed SHA, review budget, and telemetry as authoritative. Use the full PR diff for an initial review; for a follow-up, inspect unresolved feedback plus the author-only delta and do not mine unchanged or upstream-only code for new findings. Carry open findings without duplicating them, and preserve resolved or waived dispositions unless the new diff materially invalidates them.
+- Surface security regressions introduced or newly exposed by an unmerged PR
+  as normal PR review findings, not a generic private-security blocker. Reserve
+  private follow-up under `SECURITY.md` for pre-existing vulnerabilities
+  independent of the PR. Do not initiate external reporting without explicit
+  operator authorization; security classification alone does not suspend
+  operator-authorized test dispatch or waive normal review blockers.
 - Require reviewer output to follow the JSON evidence contract in
   `/etc/openshell/agent-payload/skills/gator-gate/references/review-findings-schema.md`.
   Normalize it with `validate-review-findings`; only entries with
 
@@ -40,7 +40,14 @@ If the `principal-engineer-reviewer` sub-agent fails before producing usable rev
 - You may push changes only when explicitly instructed by a GitHub comment from a maintainer or by a direct operator prompt.
 - Do not post `/ok to test <full-head-sha>` unless the current GitHub user has maintainer authority.
 - Code review is code-only. Do not run pre-commit, unit tests, or E2E locally as part of the initial PR review unless explicitly instructed.
-- Security vulnerabilities must not be triaged through public GitHub issues. Follow `SECURITY.md`.
+- Surface security-related findings introduced or newly exposed by an unmerged
+  PR in that PR's normal review, using the same evidence, severity, and blocker
+  rules as other findings. A security classification alone does not require
+  private triage or suspend operator-authorized test dispatch.
+- For pre-existing vulnerabilities independent of the PR, follow `SECURITY.md`:
+  retain detailed evidence privately and notify the operator without publishing
+  exploit details. Do not initiate external disclosure, contact PSIRT, or submit
+  a security report without explicit operator authorization.
 
 Maintainer authority means one of:
 
@@ -644,6 +651,14 @@ Keep reviews proportional, scope-bound, and convergent:
 - Route pre-existing security defects through the private security process.
   Do not publish exploit details or make them blockers on the current PR.
   Route other pre-existing defects to a non-blocking follow-up.
+- A pre-existing unsafe primitive does not make a new PR-owned exposure
+  pre-existing. Compare base and head: if the PR creates a new reachable path,
+  trusted sink, or security contract that makes the defect exploitable, surface
+  the regression in the PR review with its invariant, impact, fix, and verification.
+  Do not substitute a generic private-security notice for actionable feedback
+  or invent a `private_security_review_required` gate solely because the finding
+  is security-related. Existing review blockers still follow normal state rules;
+  this distinction does not waive findings or authorize tests otherwise forbidden.
 - Treat docs, skill drift, diagnostic wording, and test-strength feedback as
   non-blocking unless the published contract is materially false, the
   diagnostic causes an operational or safety failure, or missing coverage