The public and private keys for a crypto address are physically printed on a sheet of paper, as the name "paper wallet" suggests. These keys are frequently shown alongside their corresponding alphanumeric strings as QR codes. An individual who creates a paper wallet can receive cryptocurrency transactions by giving out their address to others. Both manually entering the keys and using a smartphone to scan the QR codes can be used to complete transactions. Users can generate fresh addresses and keys when offline with some paper wallet providers. Users must download the wallet generator as an HTML file and run it off the internet in order to accomplish this. Paper wallets are frequently thought of as a substitute for cold storage because it is possible to generate addresses offline. Their complete analog format, which makes them resistant to hacker invasion and other attacks that can only be carried out in a digital environment, is also related to their security. Between 2011 and 2016, paper wallets were highly common, however, due to the numerous risks involved, their use is now discouraged. Paper is a physically fragile material, making it susceptible to injury or destruction. The security of the tools used to create them, such as a clean computer and a printer that doesn't save file data after printing, must also be taken into account. The belief that money can be sent several times from the same address is another risk associated with using paper wallets. Imagine, for instance, that Person A (she) has 10 ETH in her paper wallet and wishes to send 3 of them to Person B (he) while retaining the other 7 for herself. The remaining 7 ETH will automatically be sent to a different address (sometimes referred to as the change address) if she sends him 3 ETH from her paper wallet. As a result, her paper wallet will be empty and she won't be able to access those 7 ETH because they were sent to an address she doesn't own. Alice might manually configure her transaction's outputs to contain Person B's address as well as a different address under her control (to transmit the change back to her), but doing so would need technical expertise. The miner who validates the transaction's block could seize the remaining 7 ETH if Person A (the original sender/owner) is unable to generate a change output for herself. She would therefore be better off transferring the full sum (10 ETH) to a cryptocurrency wallet program like Trust Wallet before sending 3 ETH to Person B.