STARKNET MAY GO SOLO AND QUANTUM SECURITY IS THE REASON.
Starknet is considering moving from an Ethereum L2 to an independent L1, according to StarkWare co-founder and CEO Eli Ben-Sasson.
The key reason isn't scaling.
It's control over its own security upgrades.
As an Ethereum L2, Starknet ultimately relies on Ethereum's underlying security. Moving to L1 could give Starknet more autonomy to upgrade its cryptographic infrastructure as quantum computing and AI-driven attacks evolve.
Starknet already uses ZK-STARKs, giving it greater cryptographic flexibility, and says it has a roadmap toward post-quantum security.
According to Ben-Sasson's timeline:
Starknet: potential quantum-security upgrade as early as 2027
Ethereum: expected to achieve comprehensive quantum resistance at the L1 level by 2029
Bitcoin: no comparable commitment has been announced
This isn't just another L2 → L1 narrative.
It's a question of who controls the security layer when cryptography itself starts changing.
If quantum computing becomes a real threat, being able to upgrade independently could become a strategic advantage.
Ethereum gave Starknet security.
Now Starknet may want the keys to its own security.
Would you rather have maximum Ethereum security or maximum control over your own cryptographic roadmap?
Starknet is considering moving from an Ethereum L2 to an independent L1, according to StarkWare co-founder and CEO Eli Ben-Sasson.
The key reason isn't scaling.
It's control over its own security upgrades.
As an Ethereum L2, Starknet ultimately relies on Ethereum's underlying security. Moving to L1 could give Starknet more autonomy to upgrade its cryptographic infrastructure as quantum computing and AI-driven attacks evolve.
Starknet already uses ZK-STARKs, giving it greater cryptographic flexibility, and says it has a roadmap toward post-quantum security.
According to Ben-Sasson's timeline:
Starknet: potential quantum-security upgrade as early as 2027
Ethereum: expected to achieve comprehensive quantum resistance at the L1 level by 2029
Bitcoin: no comparable commitment has been announced
This isn't just another L2 → L1 narrative.
It's a question of who controls the security layer when cryptography itself starts changing.
If quantum computing becomes a real threat, being able to upgrade independently could become a strategic advantage.
Ethereum gave Starknet security.
Now Starknet may want the keys to its own security.
Would you rather have maximum Ethereum security or maximum control over your own cryptographic roadmap?