On a side note, those who value their online privacy and bank credentials security should use a separate user profile (or even a separate browser to facilitate differentiating the difference) to access those sites.

As per comment #0, the issue seems to be a feature request. Hence, marking it as untriaged for further inputs from dev team.

Thanks...!!

I like this but it might be solved by transitioning to a Runtime permission model. Over to Devlin to decide.

We've chatted about this a number of times, in a few different contexts.  We've brought up the idea of a global, native "disable all" state from the toolbar or in the main menu, and also thought about it on the chrome://extensions page, and we're also experimenting with having the ability to have more control over where to let your extensions run.  There are a couple issues with the global disable toggle - in particular, if you have a subset of extensions enabled, then disable them all, then make a few more changes, what does the re-enable do? etc.  Sync is also a bit tricky.

We're definitely interested in doing something here, but it will be a matter of getting the right controls into place.  In the meantime, as a workaround, woxxom@'s suggestion of having a separate profile with no extensions is a good one (if you generally want other extensions to run in incognito).