So then, the only way CDMs are acceptable IMO is if they&#x27;re never given enough information to know where they&#x27;re running.<p>This should be a critical part of the standard and I&#x27;m surprised I haven&#x27;t heard the EFF pushing for this, specifically.  If the CDM has enough information to discriminate, your choice of browser for watching DRMed video is entirely in the publisher&#x27;s hands.<p>The fact that you may get in trouble for fooling the CDM to run on another browser is almost beside the point.  Why should we trust a black box with ANY information outside of the DRM-specific?<p>A website can refuse to load based on my user-agent, for example.  However, I have full control over what the website knows about my browser including my user-agent.  Because of this fact, I am always free from browser-discrimination on the Web.<p>But I have zero control over what the CDM knows about my browser.  Therefore, the CDM has <i>complete and unavoidable</i> ability to prevent me from accessing parts of the public Web based solely on my choice of browser.  AFAIK this is unprecedented.  It means that users are no longer free from browser-discrimination, perhaps for the first time in the history of the Web.