Starknet is weighing a transition from layer-2 to layer-1 to control its own post-quantum security upgrade timeline, StarkWare co-founder and CEO Eli Ben-Sasson said Thursday.

The shift would free the network from waiting on Ethereum, which currently anchors Starknet's security through a validity-rollup design. Under that architecture, every state transition requires a STARK proof that Ethereum verifies on-chain, and any cryptographic change to Starknet's proof system must remain compatible with Ethereum's verifier contract.

Ben-Sasson projected Starknet could reach quantum resistance by 2027, two years ahead of Ethereum's stated target of full L1 quantum resistance by the end of 2029. Bitcoin has not set a comparable target, he added.

"It may be MUCH closer than we think" to practical quantum risk, Ben-Sasson wrote on X on October 8, citing two structural pressures on existing chains: advances in quantum computing and the rapid acceleration of AI-driven mathematical research.

What does a layer-1 move change operationally?

Starknet derives its settlement security from Ethereum today. Becoming an independent chain would require StarkWare to bootstrap a validator set, finalize consensus rules, and absorb direct responsibility for slashable fault conditions.

Institutional counterparties holding bridged assets on Starknet would inherit direct exposure to Starknet's validator economics, replacing the implicit Ethereum settlement guarantee that currently underwrites the rollup. Custody and prime brokerage arrangements structured around Ethereum's security model would also need renegotiation.

Application-layer interfaces would not change for developers. End users would notice the difference only at the settlement layer, where transactions would finalize against Starknet's own consensus rather than an Ethereum-verified proof.

Why does Starknet believe 2027 is reachable?

The network already runs ZK-STARKs, a zero-knowledge proof system whose hash-function security does not rely on elliptic-curve cryptography vulnerable to quantum attack. Practitioners treat the architecture as quantum-resistant without further cryptographic migration.

Starknet also supports cryptographic agility, meaning engineers can swap its proof verifier and signature scheme without a hard fork. That structural flexibility gives StarkWare a defined migration path to a fully post-quantum stack.

StarkWare maintains an active roadmap for migrating Starknet toward post-quantum security, according to Ben-Sasson. The combination of ZK-STARKs and crypto-agile primitives lets the network sequence signature and proof upgrades without waiting on Ethereum to upgrade first.

Ethereum's roadmap, by contrast, threads post-quantum signature work through an account abstraction path that requires coordinated EIP work across client teams. That coordination extends Ethereum's timeline to late 2029, Ben-Sasson argued.

Why is AI a separate threat vector?

Ben-Sasson warned that rapid mathematical advances driven by AI create a separate reason for networks to adapt cryptographic primitives quickly. He treated AI as a parallel threat to quantum computing, not a subset of it.

"Is anyone willing to bet how much time" remains before quantum and AI pressures force an industry-wide migration, Ben-Sasson asked on X. He framed the timing gap between Starknet and Ethereum as a coordination problem rather than a capability gap.

What is the next decision point?

StarkWare has not announced a hard fork or migration date. Ben-Sasson described the L1 transition as remaining under internal evaluation. Any execution-layer change would require a governance proposal through Starknet's decentralized stack.

The decision will set the operational floor for when Starknet can decouple from Ethereum's settlement layer and pursue quantum resistance on its own schedule.