Peru Proxies

Compare the requested country, the gateway result if exposed, and an independent observation. When the sources conflict, keep both values and classify the attempt as unresolved rather than selecting the preferred answer. For PER, preserve a configuration snapshot and chronological observations containing the authorized source, connection boundary, requested and observed country, protocol outcome, destination response, retry number, and UTC time. Do not overwrite the first failure with a later success. Use only an endpoint permitted for the Peru test, keep missing measurements explicit, and never rotate around a refusal or other mandatory stop.

A local refusal, proxy authentication error, SOCKS handshake problem, TLS error, and destination denial belong to different owners. Preserve the earliest failing boundary and correct that layer before repeating the country test. Peru sits beside Chile (325,035) and Venezuela (63,583) in the South America historical-count ordering. Preserve the country labels. Combining their observations would erase the distinction the buyer is trying to validate. Keep PER comparator rows labelled and diagnose the requested Peru route from its own evidence rather than a neighbouring count. Record why each comparator belongs in the authorized review before using it.

Approve ongoing use only with a written retest trigger and rollback point. A historical success should not be presented as current evidence after the client, route configuration, target, or acceptance rule changes. Complete the PER decision table before ordering Peru access: product, precision, supported client protocol, rotation or stickiness need, sample and retry bounds, accepted output, usage basis, and evidence owner. Re-run it after configuration drift. Reject any Peru conclusion built from an unverified exit, hidden failures, or a changed rule, and repeat PER verification after a material configuration change.