I don't work at Cloudflare. I am merely trying to share my personal pragmatic point of view. In this specific case I would argue that the problem is taken out

I don't work at Cloudflare. I am merely trying to share my personal pragmatic point of view. In this specific case I would argue that the problem is taken out of scope. The idea of browser isolation is to specifically replace the "smart" stream of data that is prone to attacks with a "dumb" pre-rendered version that is much more rigid. This eliminates the whole class of attacks by design. Sure, it won't work for blind people. So if your organization employs them and you want to achieve comparable level of security, you set them up with a properly isolated VM, install the accessibility software there, and add an exception rule for that VM. Problem solved: the blind person has comparable experience to a regular browser, while the average level of security in the company has raised. If the employer specifically refuses to set up such a VM, it would be reasonable to demand it or sue them. To put it into a perspective, a blind person cannot drive a car in regular traffic due to obvious reasons. So it's reasonable to provide them with alternate means of transportation, but it would be unreasonable to demand that all cars should be banned until they can accommodate blind drivers. It can be technically done if you make every car remote-drivable, but the cost and safety considerations make it completely unviable.