There are many valid reasons for someone to choose to stay anonymous online, not least of which is the fact that online privacy is a human right. However, discrimination against users of anonymity networks from web-servers and content distribution networks on the grounds of defense against malicious users often means that genuine users are faced with excessive challenge-response tests and differentiated content, or even blocked altogether. This study has investigated the extent to which users of Mullvad VPN are blocked when accessing popular websites and it has also explored the nature of these blocks. No statistically significant difference was found when requesting only home pages from 3,000 domains, but this changed when classifying 1,000 domains and considering content beyond the home page. This impact on the user's experience is also reflected on the categories of website that most engage in blocking, with some essential services such as health and government presenting high blocking ratios. Given that more discerning ways of preventing access from malicious users without affecting genuine ones exist, this generalised blocking of Mullvad VPN users is unjustifiable.