Author: Nancy, PANews
On October 8, under the banner of quantum resistance, the veteran L2 project Starknet put forward the idea of transitioning to L1, returning to the center of market discussion and driving a double-digit single-day increase in its token price. However, behind the hype, Starknet's TVL has halved from its peak, and its token price has fallen more than 90% from its all-time high.
Even more controversial is that this "going solo" plan by the former L2 king has not only been accused of stabbing Ethereum in the back, but has also triggered multiple community doubts about its post-transition security costs, ecosystem liquidity, and quantum narrative hype.
Starknet Seeks to Transition to L1, Token Price Surge Cannot Hide Ecosystem Dilemma
Yesterday, StarkWare co-founder and CEO Eli Ben-Sasson floated an idea: in the face of security challenges in the post-quantum era, should Starknet transition from an Ethereum L2 to an independent L1 public chain?
This idea quickly attracted market attention. Ben-Sasson believes that the rapid development of quantum computing and AI may pose new security threats to the existing cryptographic system, meaning the industry must enter bunker mode and prepare for the worst-case scenario in advance. To address future security challenges, the network must meet multiple conditions, including adopting the right cryptographic technology, possessing cryptographic agility, and becoming an L1 public chain.
Ben-Sasson believes that Starknet already has the technical foundation of ZK-STARKs, cryptographic agility, and has already formulated a post-quantum security migration roadmap. But the problem is that, as an Ethereum L2, Starknet's security still depends on the underlying Ethereum. Once Ethereum fails to complete its quantum-resistant upgrade in time, Starknet's migration process may also be constrained.
According to the current plan, Ethereum aims to achieve full quantum resistance at the L1 level by the end of 2029, while Bitcoin has not yet made a similar commitment. In order to gain more autonomous control over the network security upgrade process, Starknet is considering multiple options, including transitioning to L1. Ben-Sasson said Starknet is expected to achieve a quantum-safe upgrade as early as 2027.
Boosted by this idea, amid a broad decline in the crypto market, STRK surged against the trend. CoinGecko data shows that in the past 24 hours, STRK rose 41.2%, but is still down about 98.5% from its all-time high.
Starknet was once known alongside Optimism, Arbitrum, and zkSync as the "four heavenly kings" of the L2 track. However, as the market environment changed and ecosystem growth came under pressure, this star project has struggled to regain its former glory. Events such as airdrop controversies, frequent CEO turnover, and controversial remarks have repeatedly plunged Starknet into public opinion storms. At the same time, ecosystem liquidity has continued to come under pressure, and on-chain activity and revenue performance have also struggled to support the market's once-high expectations.
DeFiLlama data shows that as of October 9, Starknet's TVL was about $160 million. Although it has rebounded from last year's trough, it is still down more than 50.6% from its historical peak. At the same time, revenue performance is equally unimpressive. Over the past two years, daily on-chain revenue has mostly been only a few thousand dollars or even lower, far from the level of hundreds of thousands of dollars per day during its peak.
Starknet's pursuit of transformation is not accidental. As competition on the L2 track intensifies, once highly sought-after star projects have also begun to face dual tests of growth bottlenecks and business models. Projects such as Blast and Abstract have recently moved toward shutdown one after another. The chill in the L2 track is growing, and industry reshuffling is further accelerating. For projects unable to sustain innovation and build core competitiveness, elimination may only be a matter of time.
Community Questions Crossing the River and Demolishing the Bridge, Post-Quantum Security Solution Still Missing
Starknet's idea of starting anew has triggered backlash from the crypto community.
Once upon a time, Starknet successfully attracted a great deal of market attention, gained liquidity and ecosystem resources, and at one point achieved a valuation as high as $8 billion, relying on Ethereum's ZK-Rollup technical route and the narrative of inheriting Ethereum's security. Now that the L2 business is sluggish, Starknet has instead begun to entertain the idea of "going solo," considering a transition to an independent L1 on the grounds that Ethereum's upgrade progress may constrain post-quantum security. This move has also triggered community doubts, with some believing Starknet is crossing the river and demolishing the bridge.
However, transitioning to an independent L1 is not without cost. The community questions that once it breaks away from Ethereum's security system, Starknet will need to assume more responsibility for underlying security maintenance and upgrades, including establishing reliable security mechanisms and addressing potential attack risks. At the same time, Starknet will also face tests in ecosystem building and liquidity acquisition. Moreover, Starknet is already under growth pressure, and whether the transition can attract enough developers, users, and capital to support the long-term operation of an independent public chain remains highly uncertain.
In addition to the controversy over the transition itself, Starknet has also been questioned for using market concerns about cryptographic security to build momentum for itself.
Recently, AI's breakthrough progress in mathematical research has ignited concerns in the crypto industry about cryptographic security. OpenAI released research results containing 722 digital manuscripts, including answers to hundreds of unsolved problems, which shocked academia and made AI's acceleration in cracking mathematical problems a focus of industry attention.
On October 8, a warning article published by Ethereum Foundation core researcher Justin Drake further raised the heat of discussion. He called on the crypto industry to enter "bunker mode" and reassess the risks that AI development may pose to the existing cryptographic system.
Drake believes that AI's progress in mathematical reasoning may accelerate the process of cracking existing cryptographic algorithms. For the crypto industry, this means that potential security threats may not necessarily appear only after quantum computing matures. He specifically pointed out that the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA), which protects Bitcoin and Ethereum wallets, may face risks earlier than expected, and it is even possible that it could be broken before quantum computers have practical attack capabilities. According to his most pessimistic scenario, the relevant risk window may be measured in months rather than years.
To reduce potential risks, Drake suggested adopting an orderly asset migration strategy, prioritizing the transfer of large assets to new addresses whose public keys have not yet been exposed, and after transaction signing, further assessing how to reduce the public key exposure risk of remaining assets. He also called on institutions such as Binance, Bitbank, Robinhood, Bitfinex, and Tether to strengthen cold storage security.
On the technical route, Justin Drake also said that Ethereum's roadmap on strawmap[.]org fully adopts hash-based cryptography and end-to-end formal verification to address quantum threats. Given the emergence of mathematical superintelligence, these timelines must now be re-examined and accelerated.
Ethereum founder Vitalik subsequently responded that users are not advised to rush to transfer assets because of this, but the industry should take seriously the cryptographic risks brought by AI-accelerated mathematical research, not only quantum-vulnerable algorithms but also algorithms that may be affected by AI. He believes the core new risk lies in lattice cryptography such as ML-DSA and fully homomorphic encryption (FHE). If AI brings about the equivalent of about 50 years of mathematical progress in the next two years, the concrete security of lattice cryptography may decline significantly, and ECDSA may also fall earlier than expected. This is one of the important reasons why Ethereum's Lean roadmap has shifted over the past year toward pure hash signatures (such as WOTS, SPHINCS-) and reduced reliance on lattice cryptography.
To some extent, Starknet's pursuit of transformation on the grounds of potential post-quantum security risks has indeed tapped into the current security anxiety in the crypto industry. But as of now, Starknet has not yet proposed a specific and executable quantum-resistant security solution, and even the transition idea has not yet formally entered the on-chain governance proposal stage.
Therefore, whether Starknet can produce a quantum-resistant security solution that withstands scrutiny, and whether after a real transition it can truly establish an independent security system and ecosystem advantages, remains to be seen. If it lacks a clear technical path and sustainable growth logic, it will probably be difficult to regain market trust based solely on the post-quantum security narrative.