Sarwar🍌

you wouldn't announce your bank balance in a crowded market so why should a company reveal its entire financial position onchain just to prove it's trustworthy? this is where trust gets complicated reveal too much, and competitors gain insight into your positions and strategy reveal too little, and others have no reliable way to verify your claims for institutions, trust shouldn't have to come at the cost of privacy @primus_labs approaches this problem with a simple principle think of a sealed envelope you can verify who sent it and check whether its contents meet certain conditions without making the entire letter public primus brings a similar idea to financial data through different layers of technology zkTLS verifies the source it helps prove that data came from a legitimate web source, such as a bank or exchange, without requiring the underlying information to be published onchain zkFHE enables computation on encrypted data instead of exposing sensitive inputs during processing, computations can run while the data remains encrypted the result can provide useful proof without revealing every underlying detail put these pieces together, and the possibilities become interesting a platform could demonstrate that its reserves meet a required threshold without broadcasting every wallet and balance to the market a borrower could prove they meet certain financial requirements without exposing their entire financial history the goal isn't to make financial activity impossible to inspect it's to make verification possible without unnecessary exposure because privacy and secrecy are not the same thing secrecy prevents others from checking your claims privacy lets them verify what matters without seeing everything else that distinction could make a real difference for institutions considering onchain finance they need transparency where trust requires it and confidentiality where business demands it if you want to feel how that verification works, not just read about it, the XP tasks walk you through it: s.kaito.ai/HdOuqEr

imagine your house needs a new lock but even though it’s your house, you can’t fully control when that upgrade happens because part of its security still depends on your neighbour that’s the dilemma behind @Starknet's independent L1 research and quantum computing is what makes the question more urgent as quantum computers advance, some of today’s cryptographic systems could become vulnerable starknet has already taken steps to prepare for that future its account system can support new signature schemes without requiring users to rebuild everything from scratch its STARK proofs also rely on hash-based cryptography, which is not vulnerable to Shor’s algorithm in the same way as elliptic-curve cryptography so parts of starknet are designed to adapt but preparing the house is only half the problem starknet still depends on ethereum for two critical pieces of its security model » the bridge connecting the two networks » data availability, which ensures transaction data remains available for verification even if starknet upgrades its own cryptography, these dependencies still matter when assessing its overall post-quantum security and this is where timing becomes important starknet has discussed a 2027 target for post-quantum readiness, while ethereum has targeted the end of 2029 for its own transition different timelines create a difficult trade-off starknet can prepare its own systems, but parts of its security roadmap remain connected to ethereum’s progress that’s why an independent L1 is being explored with its own L1, starknet could gain greater control over how and when it upgrades its security, rather than relying as heavily on another network’s schedule this is still research, not a confirmed move in october 2026, a non-binding community poll recorded 93.52% support for researching the independent L1 path STRK would remain the native token, bridges to ethereum would stay open, and any transition would still require governance approval to me, the bigger question goes beyond quantum resistance it’s about having the freedom to respond when the security landscape changes because a strong lock matters but so does having the authority to change it before it becomes a weakness read more ↓ quantum.starkware.co