jayzin66

Starknet accounts allow for changing signature schemes without requiring a network-wide upgrade. @Starknet On most blockchains, the method for verifying signatures is hardcoded into the protocol. Implementing a new signature scheme would typically require a simultaneous network-wide upgrade, affecting all users. Starknet takes a different approach: accounts are smart contracts. Since the authentication logic resides within the account itself, each account can independently select its own verifier. Through a "Migration Register," a new implementation can introduce a different signature scheme without altering the underlying protocol. However, existing accounts do not migrate automatically; account holders must proactively initiate the upgrade. Does the address change? Generally, no. A Starknet account address is derived from its initial class hash, a salt, the initialization calldata, and the deployer's address meaning it remains fixed from the moment of deployment. During an upgrade, an account may switch to a new class hash via the replace class system call, but its address, assets, and history remain unchanged. This is contingent upon the account having a built-in upgrade mechanism; if a contract lacks such a function, it cannot modify its own authentication logic. Regarding Falcon-512: The OpenZeppelin implementation currently on Mainnet is a demo version and has not yet undergone an audit a status explicitly noted in the Register. This serves as a proof-of-concept rather than a production-ready solution for handling real funds. Before using it for significant assets, wait for an independent audit. In summary, this flexibility stems from the fact that authentication is handled as contract logic rather than as a rigid protocol rule. @Starknet The trade-off is that the responsibility shifts to users and wallet developers: they must manage their own upgrades, conduct their own audits, and decide when to transition.