Starknet Isn't Preparing For Quantum. It's Built To Outlive It. Most chains are asking: "How do we survive quantum?" @Starknet is asking a different question: "How do we keep upgrading forever?" Eli Ben Sasson calls it cryptographic agility. And it's the most important idea in crypto right now. Quantum isn't one upgrade. It's not a patch you ship once and forget. It's a moving threat. The chain that wins won't be the one that is quantum-safe today it will be the one that can become quantum-safe again, and again, and again, as the threat evolves. This is where $Starknet was built different from day one. 1. STARKs Were Already Quantum-Resistant While other chains built their proving systems on elliptic curves that a quantum computer could break, Starknet built on hash-based STARK proofs. Hashes don't break under quantum the same way. That means Starknet does NOT need to replace its proving system to migrate. The core is already ready. Most chains will have to rebuild the engine. Starknet just needs to change the tires. 2. Account Abstraction = Seamless Signature Migration On most chains, your account IS your signature. To go post quantum, you have to change the protocol. On Starknet, accounts are smart contracts. Native account abstraction means a wallet can adopt a post-quantum signature like Lamport or XMSS without Starknet changing its rules. The user upgrades. The protocol doesn't break. The Roadmap Is Already Public In June, StarkWare laid out the 3-phase migration: Phase 1: Core Cryptography Replace Pedersen hashing with BLAKE2 across state commitments, contract addresses, and network config. Add post-quantum consensus signatures. This is the foundation. Phase 2: Migration Tooling Give every existing contract a clear path to the new setup. No one left behind. Phase 3: The Hard One Ethereum And here is the truth no one wants to say: As an L2, Starknet inherits its security from Ethereum. Starknet can move fast, but it can only be fully quantum-safe when Ethereum is. This is the bottleneck of all L2s. Which is why at Token2049, Eli put a bold question to the community: ( Should Starknet become an L1 for post-quantum agility?) Not a decision. A question. Asked in public, the way it should be. If the threat demands speed that Ethereum's timeline can't give, should Starknet have the sovereignty to move alone? That's not a technical debate. That's a debate about the future of the chain. Bottom Line Every chain will claim to be quantum-safe. Only one was designed to be crypto-agile from genesis hash-based proofs, abstracted accounts, and a roadmap already in motion. @Starknet isn't waiting for quantum. It's building the ability to survive whatever comes after quantum. And that changes everything.