docs: close Phase 5D security hardening

The documentation still described Phase 5D as in progress, Phase 6 as
blocked, and a disposable-runner isolation proof as a prerequisite for
opening the real pull request. All five passes and the independent
whole-repository re-audit have landed, so those statements no longer
match the accepted operating model.

The README's current status now records Phase 5D as complete under the
current trusted-contributor, not-yet-deployed threat model, with Phase 6
unblocked, and gains a pass 5 closure paragraph covering the re-audit,
the repository-local supply-chain and dependency fixes, the accepted
trusted-code-only CI boundary, and what remains required before
untrusted CI or a public launch. The pass 1-4 paragraphs keep their
technical content unchanged; only their tense changes, so each reads as
what was outstanding at the close of that pass rather than as a current
claim.

`platform-architecture.md` no longer stops at pass 1 or says passes 2-5
are unfinished; it summarizes all five passes and defers the remaining
operational limitations to the security document.

`security.md` states the trusted-code-only operating rule explicitly and
replaces "CI blockers before the real pull request is opened" with
"Requirements before executing untrusted contributions", framing the five
hardening items as prerequisites for relaxing that rule rather than as
Phase 6 blockers, and naming an isolated hosted-runner service as an
accepted alternative. The Gitea 1.24.2 warnings, the scope of
`persist-credentials: false`, and the unverified runner topology and
job-token authority are preserved verbatim; no external Gitea setting is
claimed. The launch checklist is marked as gating a public launch, not
development.

Both Doctor examples are corrected to the real three-migration output,
adding `core:0002_authorization_integrity · 634294731180`. The stale
sentence calling Core authorization the next architectural phase is
refreshed.

ADRs 0017-0020 are untouched: their statements that later passes were
outstanding are historical records made when each was accepted.

Documentation only — no production code, test, workflow, dependency,
migration, or schema change.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]>

docs/development/repository-workflow.md

@@ -108,9 +108,10 @@ Data definitions
   ✓ Schemas validated
     0 modules · 0 tables
   ✓ Migrations validated
-    2 migrations · checksums valid
+    3 migrations · checksums valid
     core:0000_identity_core_tables · f8f2086ef06f
     core:0001_authorization_core_tables · 830e1fbc26d0
+    core:0002_authorization_integrity · 634294731180
 
 PostgreSQL
   ○ Connection check skipped
@@ -133,11 +134,11 @@ Result: READY WITH WARNINGS
 Doctor is a local, human-readable summary. `pnpm verify`, `pnpm ci:verify`, infrastructure smoke,
 and migration smoke remain the authoritative automated evidence because they exercise formatting,
 boundaries, types, tests, builds, containers, and live mutation/rollback behavior that Doctor does
-not repeat. Core authorization and an explicit platform-owner bootstrap command are the next
-architectural phase; Doctor does not diagnose authorization, the `apps/api` HTTP transport, runtime
-module health, or production storage yet, and it never constructs an operational Better Auth
-instance, starts the API, or claims sign-in works. See [API](api.md) for `pnpm api:start` and the
-identity HTTP transport this repository now has.
+not repeat. Core authorization and the explicit platform-owner bootstrap command have since shipped,
+and Doctor reports the composed permission registry; it still does not diagnose grant evaluation, the
+`apps/api` HTTP transport, runtime module health, or production storage, and it never constructs an
+operational Better Auth instance, starts the API, or claims sign-in works. See [API](api.md) for
+`pnpm api:start` and the identity HTTP transport this repository now has.
 
 Migration planning and application require `DATABASE_URL`. Keep it in the uncommitted `.env`
 created from `.env.example`: