Starknet is back in focus after StarkWare co-founder and CEO Eli Ben-Sasson raised the possibility of turning the network from an Ethereum Layer 2 into an independent Layer 1, framing the move as part of a response to post-quantum security risks.
The market reacted quickly. CoinGecko data cited in the report shows STRK rose 41.2% over the past 24 hours while the broader crypto market was falling, although the token remains about 98.5% below its all-time high.
Starknet weighs an L1 path
Ben-Sasson said rapid progress in quantum computing and AI could create new threats for current cryptographic systems, and argued that the industry needs to enter a “bunker mode” and prepare for worst-case scenarios in advance. In his view, a network built to handle future security challenges needs several things: the right cryptographic technology, cryptographic agility, and the status of an L1 chain.
He said Starknet already has a foundation in ZK-STARKs, has cryptographic agility, and has laid out a roadmap for post-quantum migration. The problem, he said, is that Starknet still depends on Ethereum for security as an L2. If Ethereum does not complete a quantum-resistant upgrade in time, Starknet’s own migration could be constrained.
Under the current plan, Ethereum is targeting full post-quantum capability at the L1 level by the end of 2029, while Bitcoin has made no similar commitment. Ben-Sasson said Starknet is considering several options, including an L1 transition, to gain more control over its own security upgrade schedule. He added that Starknet could complete a quantum-safe upgrade as early as 2027.
Price jump does not erase ecosystem pressure
The token move has not changed the broader picture around Starknet’s ecosystem. Starknet was once grouped with Optimism, Arbitrum and zkSync as one of the “big four” in the L2 sector, but the project has struggled to maintain that earlier momentum as market conditions changed and ecosystem growth came under pressure.
The report notes that airdrop disputes, frequent CEO changes and controversial remarks have repeatedly pushed Starknet into public controversy. At the same time, liquidity has remained under strain, while on-chain activity and revenue have not supported the market’s earlier expectations.
According to DeFiLlama data cited in the article, Starknet’s TVL stood at about $160 million as of Oct. 9. That is up from last year’s low, but still more than 50.6% below its historical peak. Revenue has also been weak. Over the past two years, daily on-chain revenue has often been only a few thousand dollars or less, far below the hundreds of thousands of dollars per day seen at peak levels.
The article says the timing of Starknet’s strategic rethink is not accidental. Competition across the L2 sector has intensified, and projects once treated as breakout stars are now facing both growth bottlenecks and business-model pressure. Blast and Abstract, for example, have recently moved toward shutdowns, adding to signs of a harsher shakeout in the sector.
Community pushback centers on the cost of leaving Ethereum
The idea of Starknet striking out on its own has triggered criticism across the crypto community. Starknet originally drew market attention, liquidity and ecosystem resources through its Ethereum ZK-Rollup positioning and the narrative that it inherited Ethereum’s security. At one point, it reached a valuation of as much as $8 billion.
Now, with the L2 business under pressure, the project is considering an independent L1 route on the grounds that Ethereum’s upgrade pace could limit post-quantum security progress. That has led some in the community to accuse Starknet of walking away after benefiting from Ethereum’s security umbrella.
The concerns are not only rhetorical. If Starknet leaves Ethereum’s security framework, it would need to take on more responsibility for base-layer security maintenance and upgrades, including building reliable security mechanisms and dealing with potential attack risks. It would also face the challenge of rebuilding ecosystem depth and attracting liquidity on its own.
Given the project’s existing growth pressure, the report says there is still major uncertainty over whether a transition could attract enough developers, users and capital to support the long-term operation of an independent public chain.
AI-driven cryptography fears have raised the temperature
Beyond the transition debate itself, Starknet has also been accused of using market anxiety around cryptographic security to build momentum. Recent advances in AI-driven mathematical research have pushed that discussion higher across the crypto sector.
The article says OpenAI released research results containing 722 digital manuscripts, including answers to hundreds of unsolved problems. That development shook the academic community and sharpened industry attention on whether AI could accelerate the solving of difficult mathematical problems.
On Oct. 8, Ethereum Foundation core researcher Justin Drake published a warning that added to the debate. He called on the crypto industry to enter “bunker mode” and reassess the risks that AI development could pose to existing cryptographic systems. Drake argued that progress in mathematical reasoning by AI could speed up the breaking of current cryptographic algorithms, meaning the threat may arrive before practical quantum computing does.
He specifically said the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm, or ECDSA, which protects Bitcoin and Ethereum wallets, could face risk earlier than expected, and might even be broken before quantum computers gain practical offensive capability. In his most pessimistic scenario, the relevant risk window could be measured in months rather than years.
To reduce that risk, Drake suggested an orderly asset migration strategy, with priority given to moving large holdings to fresh addresses whose public keys have not yet been exposed. After signing transactions, he said, the industry should also assess how to reduce the remaining risk of public-key exposure. He also called on Binance, Bitbank, Robinhood, Bitfinex and Tether to strengthen cold-storage security.
On the technical side, Drake said Ethereum’s roadmap on strawmap[.]org has fully adopted hash-based cryptography and end-to-end formal verification to address quantum threats. Given the possible arrival of mathematical superintelligence, he said those timelines now need to be revisited and accelerated.
Vitalik responds as Starknet still lacks a concrete plan
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik later responded that users should not rush to move assets because of these concerns, but he said the industry should take seriously the cryptographic risks created by AI-accelerated mathematical research. In his view, the issue is not limited to quantum-vulnerable algorithms and also extends to algorithms that AI progress could weaken.
He said the key new risks involve lattice cryptography used in systems such as ML-DSA and fully homomorphic encryption, or FHE. If AI delivers mathematical progress over the next two years equivalent to roughly the past 50 years, the concrete security assumptions behind lattice cryptography could weaken materially, and ECDSA could also fail earlier than expected. He said that is one reason Ethereum’s Lean roadmap has shifted over the past year toward pure hash-based signatures such as WOTS and SPHINCS-, while reducing reliance on lattice cryptography.
For now, however, Starknet has not presented a specific and executable post-quantum security plan, and the L1 transition idea has not formally entered the on-chain governance proposal stage.
The report says Starknet has clearly tapped into the crypto market’s current security anxiety, but whether it can produce a plan that stands up to scrutiny, and whether it can build an independent security system and ecosystem edge after any real transition, remains unresolved.