Reasoning systems increasingly separate intermediate computation into private and public channels, creating evaluation cases that look similar in transcripts: independent co-derivation, direct access to private content, and indirect influence through public communication. This paper presents a counterfactual likelihood test for measuring influence between private reasoning channels. The method replaces an upstream private block with a length-matched donor block, holds the public token sequence and downstream target fixed, and measures the downstream target's negative-log-likelihood shift. On a 7B role-channel reasoning model used for validation, textual probes are unreliable: raw n-gram overlap overstates leakage, corrected overlap remains noisy, and canary reproduction reports no discrimination. Counterfactual likelihood separates unmasked and masked conditions, while length matching controls a RoPE positional confound. In the hardened masked validation, reverse B-to-A influence is near zero, while A-to-B influence persists through public-speech hidden states. A multi-checkpoint validation across three checkpoints, five seeds, and 13,734 valid directional contrasts replicates this asymmetry. A graph-separation control that blocks private-to-public carrier edges produces bit-identical natural and counterfactual scores across all 13,734 control evaluations, identifying the tested public-channel pathway as the complete carrier of the measured counterfactual signal under the implemented role-visibility mask. The results show that private-channel evaluation should report direct and indirect influence separately, and that counterfactual likelihood probes provide a practical default for measuring these boundaries.