Ethereum Delays Glamsterdam Upgrade After Smart Contract Security Risks Emerge

Last Updated on November 9, 2026 by Michael Motha

Ethereum’s next major network upgrade has encountered an important obstacle after security researchers identified potential vulnerabilities in smart contracts that could be affected by proposed changes to the network’s gas accounting system. The Ethereum Foundation has confirmed that developers are delaying the next stage of the Glamsterdam hard fork until the issues are better understood and resolved.

The discovery emerged during testnet preparation for Glamsterdam, an upgrade designed to improve Ethereum’s transaction processing, network efficiency and long-term scalability. Researchers at blockchain security firm ChainSecurity identified projects that could behave differently after the proposed changes because their smart contracts rely on assumptions about how gas is consumed and returned during failed transactions.

The findings have prompted Ethereum’s All Core Developers community to postpone the planned Hoodi testnet fork. The Foundation is now asking contract developers, security auditors and infrastructure teams to examine their projects for dependencies that could become unsafe under the proposed gas rules.

Importantly, this is not a report of an attack on Ethereum’s main network or a confirmed loss of user funds. It is a preventive security review before a major protocol change reaches further stages of deployment.

The decision highlights a central challenge for Ethereum: improving network capacity while ensuring that existing decentralised applications continue to operate safely.

Key Takeaways

• Ethereum has delayed the next stage of the Glamsterdam hard fork after researchers identified potential smart contract vulnerabilities.
• The concerns involve EIP-8037 and EIP-8038, which propose changes to state creation costs and gas accounting.
• ChainSecurity identified contracts that could behave differently when failed calls return gas or when gas costs change.
• The Ethereum Foundation has postponed the Hoodi testnet fork until the identified issues are addressed.
• Developers, auditors and contract teams have been asked to review eight gas-related invariants that could be affected.
• Work on the separate Hegotá upgrade continues during the Glamsterdam delay.
• The incident demonstrates why extensive testing and security reviews are essential before blockchain protocol upgrades.

Ethereum Foundation Pauses the Glamsterdam Upgrade Process

Glamsterdam is the next major upgrade in Ethereum’s development roadmap following Fusaka. It is intended to improve how the network constructs blocks, processes transactions and manages the growing demands placed on its infrastructure.

The upgrade is designed to introduce several technical improvements, including enshrined proposer-builder separation, block-level access lists and revised gas pricing.

However, testing has revealed that some of the proposed changes may affect the behaviour of existing smart contracts.

In its November 6 development update, the Ethereum Foundation explained that ChainSecurity had identified projects relying on certain assumptions that would no longer remain valid after Glamsterdam.

The Foundation subsequently decided to delay the hard fork process and avoid activating the upgrade on the Hoodi testnet until the problems are resolved.

The announcement also called on contract developers and auditors to examine their applications for dependencies involving the affected gas rules.

The latest development can be followed through the Ethereum Foundation’s official Glamsterdam security update, which explains why the testing process has been paused and what developers are expected to review.

The decision demonstrates that Ethereum’s development process is not simply about meeting upgrade schedules. Security and compatibility remain essential requirements, even when they require additional engineering work.

What Is Glamsterdam and Why Does Ethereum Need It?

Glamsterdam is intended to advance Ethereum’s Layer 1 scaling strategy.

As the network supports decentralised finance, stablecoins, tokenised assets, blockchain games and other smart-contract applications, its infrastructure must handle increasing activity without making independent participation unnecessarily difficult.

The proposed upgrade addresses several parts of this challenge.

One major component is enshrined proposer-builder separation, commonly known as ePBS. It aims to incorporate more of the coordination between block proposers and builders directly into Ethereum’s protocol.

Another component involves block-level access lists. These are designed to make the accounts and storage locations accessed during block execution more explicit, potentially improving how nodes process and verify transactions.

Glamsterdam also includes changes to gas pricing. These adjustments aim to make transaction costs reflect the computational and storage resources consumed by network activity.

The broader objective is to improve Ethereum’s capacity while preserving the ability of independent validators and node operators to participate.

CryptoNewsOnlineHub previously examined Ethereum’s next scaling upgrade and its impact on network efficiency. The latest security findings add another important dimension to that development: proposed performance improvements must also remain compatible with applications already operating on the network.

EIP-8037 and EIP-8038 Are at the Centre of the Concerns

The security review focuses on two Ethereum Improvement Proposals: EIP-8037 and EIP-8038.

Both proposals change how Ethereum measures and charges for certain operations.

EIP-8037 introduces a separate accounting system for state creation costs. Its objective is to make the cost of creating new blockchain state more consistent and manageable as Ethereum increases its capacity.

State refers to the information maintained by the blockchain, including account balances, contract storage and other data required to execute transactions correctly.

As more applications use Ethereum, the network must manage the continuing growth of this information. Increasing transaction capacity without accounting for state growth could place additional pressure on node operators.

The proposal therefore introduces separate execution-gas and state-gas accounting.

The technical details are available in the EIP-8037 specification for state creation gas costs.

EIP-8038 addresses another part of the problem by revising gas costs associated with accessing and modifying blockchain state.

Its proposed changes are described in the EIP-8038 state-access gas update.

Together, these proposals are intended to create a more sustainable gas model for Ethereum.

The difficulty is that existing smart contracts may rely on the current relationship between gas consumption, failed calls and the amount of gas remaining after an operation.

Changing that relationship can produce unexpected results even when the contract’s original source code remains unchanged.

Why Gas Accounting Changes Could Affect Existing Smart Contracts

Gas is the unit Ethereum uses to measure the computational resources required to execute transactions and smart-contract operations.

Every operation consumes a certain amount of gas. Users pay transaction fees based on the gas used and the applicable fee conditions.

Smart contracts often contain additional logic to manage failed transactions.

For example, a decentralised application may call another contract, detect whether the operation succeeded and then record a failure if something goes wrong.

Some contracts rely on the expectation that an operation running out of gas will leave too little gas for the remaining failure-handling code to complete.

That assumption can be important.

If the failure handler cannot finish, the entire transaction may revert. This can prevent the contract from recording an incomplete operation or permanently disabling a process that should remain available for another attempt.

However, Glamsterdam’s proposed changes could alter how much gas remains available after a failed call.

Under certain conditions, a contract may receive gas back through changes to state accounting or through a reverting intermediary contract.

As a result, a failure-handling routine that previously could not complete may now have enough resources to continue.

This can create an unexpected outcome.

A contract might record a failed operation as permanent even though the original call failed because it did not receive sufficient gas. In other situations, an existing gas check may incorrectly interpret the result.

The problem is not necessarily that a contract contains an obvious programming mistake. It may be relying on behaviour that changes under the proposed protocol rules.

ChainSecurity Identifies Potential Vulnerability Patterns

ChainSecurity’s technical analysis explains several ways in which Glamsterdam could affect existing contract logic.

One concern involves gas returned after a failed external call.

A contract may assume that a failed operation leaves only a small amount of gas available. It can then use the remaining gas to decide whether the failure should be recorded or whether the entire transaction should be reverted.

Under the proposed changes, state-gas accounting can alter this calculation.

Another concern involves storage operations.

When a contract creates and subsequently clears certain storage slots, the new accounting rules can return gas to the execution process. This may allow a failure-handling routine to complete when it previously would have run out of gas.

A third issue involves intermediary contracts.

A contract may call another contract, which then calls a separate target. If the final operation fails and the intermediary reverts, the proposed gas-accounting changes could return resources to the original caller.

This can affect assumptions used by the original contract to identify why an operation failed.

ChainSecurity also explains that gas budgets considered sufficient under the previous rules may become inadequate after the proposed repricing changes.

Its technical analysis of Glamsterdam’s gas-accounting risks provides examples of these situations and recommends that developers reassess how their contracts handle failed calls.

The findings are particularly important for decentralised finance applications, lending protocols, automated trading systems, bridges and other applications that rely on complex interactions between smart contracts.

Why the Ethereum Foundation Is Asking Developers to Participate

Ethereum is a decentralised network supported by multiple client teams, validators, infrastructure providers and application developers.

The Ethereum Foundation cannot independently inspect every smart contract deployed across the ecosystem.

Many applications also contain off-chain components, external services and integrations that may influence how transactions behave.

Consequently, the Foundation is asking contract developers and auditors to review their own systems.

Its announcement identifies eight gas-related invariants that could be affected by Glamsterdam. The Foundation has also published a repository containing explanations, examples and prompts that developers can use to examine their codebases.

The objective is to identify applications that depend on assumptions that will change after the upgrade.

Developers who discover a potential issue are encouraged to contact the Foundation so that the findings can inform discussions about whether specification changes are required.

This approach is important because a protocol upgrade can affect applications in ways that are difficult to predict from the core software alone.

A contract that has operated successfully for years may still depend on a particular gas behaviour that is not guaranteed to remain unchanged.

The review therefore needs participation from the wider Ethereum ecosystem.

Hoodi Testnet Delay Does Not Mean Ethereum’s Mainnet Has Been Compromised

It is important to understand what the announcement does and does not mean.

The identified risks concern how certain smart contracts could behave after the proposed Glamsterdam changes are introduced.

The Foundation has not announced that Ethereum’s mainnet has been compromised by these issues.

Nor does the delay mean that all Ethereum smart contracts are vulnerable.

The affected projects are those that rely on specific assumptions involving gas accounting, failed calls and state changes. The extent of the impact depends on the contract’s design and execution paths.

Hoodi is one of Ethereum’s public testnets, where developers and infrastructure teams can examine protocol changes before a mainnet deployment.

Postponing the Hoodi fork provides additional time to investigate potential problems before the upgrade progresses further.

This is a preventive measure rather than evidence of a live network failure.

For users, the distinction is important. The announcement should not be interpreted as a reason to assume that ETH wallets, ordinary transfers or every decentralised application are suddenly unsafe.

However, developers operating affected contracts should take the warning seriously and follow official guidance.

What Happens to Ethereum’s Hegotá Upgrade?

The Glamsterdam delay does not mean that all Ethereum development has stopped.

The Ethereum Foundation has specifically stated that work on Hegotá will continue in parallel.

This illustrates how Ethereum’s development process can involve several overlapping research and engineering efforts.

Some teams can continue working on future protocol improvements while other developers investigate issues affecting the current upgrade.

Nevertheless, the priority for Glamsterdam remains resolving the identified compatibility risks before the Hoodi testnet activation proceeds.

The delay also demonstrates why network upgrade schedules should be treated as provisional.

A proposed activation date can change when testing reveals problems that require additional investigation.

Ethereum’s developers must coordinate software releases, testnet deployments, validator preparation and application compatibility before introducing major changes to the main network.

What the Delay Means for Ethereum Developers and Businesses

For smart-contract developers, the immediate priority is to review code that makes assumptions about gas remaining after failed calls.

Applications using external calls, complex failure handlers, storage operations and intermediary contracts deserve particular attention.

Developers should also examine fixed gas budgets and conditions that use the remaining gas to decide whether an operation succeeded.

Simply increasing a gas limit may not resolve the underlying issue. The important task is understanding how the contract behaves under the proposed accounting rules.

Security auditors also have a role to play.

Existing audit reports may have been completed under the previous gas schedule. If the protocol changes, some assumptions within those reports may need to be reviewed.

Businesses building on Ethereum should monitor the upgrade process and assess whether their applications depend on affected contract behaviour.

This is especially relevant to financial services that automate transfers, lending, collateral management or settlement through multiple smart contracts.

For institutions considering blockchain infrastructure, the incident reinforces the importance of technical due diligence and ongoing security reviews.

CryptoNewsOnlineHub’s earlier coverage of Ethereum’s preparation for long-term quantum-resistant blockchain security explored another example of the engineering challenges involved in protecting a network designed to operate over decades.

Although quantum resistance and gas-accounting compatibility are different issues, both demonstrate why Ethereum must continuously evaluate the assumptions supporting its infrastructure.

Could the Delay Affect ETH’s Market Sentiment?

Protocol developments can influence how investors view Ethereum, but the relationship between technical upgrades and ETH’s market price is not straightforward.

A major upgrade can improve confidence when it delivers measurable benefits. However, delays may create uncertainty, particularly when investors are expecting improvements in network capacity or transaction efficiency.

The latest announcement could attract attention because Glamsterdam is an important part of Ethereum’s scaling roadmap.

Nevertheless, the delay should not automatically be interpreted as a bearish signal.

The Foundation has paused the upgrade process to address potential security problems before further deployment. This is a normal part of responsible protocol development.

In fact, identifying compatibility issues during testing can be preferable to discovering them after a mainnet activation.

ETH’s market performance will continue to depend on several factors, including investor demand, network activity, staking participation, institutional investment, liquidity and competition from other blockchain platforms.

A postponed testnet milestone does not independently determine the future price of ETH.

Investors should distinguish between a technical development and its actual economic consequences.

What Ethereum Users Should Watch Next

The next important developments will involve the resolution of the identified issues and the resumption of Glamsterdam testing.

Several milestones deserve attention:

1. Updated technical guidance: The Ethereum Foundation may publish further explanations or specification changes as developers investigate the affected gas invariants.
2. Smart-contract reviews: Application teams and auditors will need to identify contracts that depend on the affected gas behaviour.
3. Hoodi testnet schedule: A new activation date should only be expected after the outstanding issues have been addressed.
4. Client and developer coordination: Execution-layer and consensus-layer teams must ensure that the upgrade remains compatible across participating software implementations.
5. Mainnet readiness: The final deployment decision will depend on successful testing, implementation quality and confidence across the Ethereum ecosystem.

The official Glamsterdam roadmap on Ethereum.org provides an overview of the upgrade’s objectives and development status.

Users and node operators should rely on current official announcements rather than previously published testnet dates that have been superseded.

Industry Outlook: Security Is Becoming as Important as Scalability

Ethereum’s latest upgrade delay highlights a wider challenge facing blockchain networks.

As decentralised applications become more complex and financial institutions explore blockchain infrastructure, protocol changes must account for the behaviour of existing applications.

A network can increase transaction capacity and introduce more efficient execution mechanisms, but those improvements are valuable only if applications continue to operate safely.

This creates a difficult engineering balance.

Developers must improve throughput, manage blockchain state growth, maintain decentralisation and preserve compatibility with a large collection of existing smart contracts.

The Glamsterdam findings demonstrate how a change in one part of the protocol can affect assumptions elsewhere in the ecosystem.

The issue is particularly relevant as Ethereum supports more financial applications involving stablecoins, tokenised assets and decentralised finance.

The wider infrastructure transition is also discussed in CryptoNewsOnlineHub’s analysis of how crypto market infrastructure is evolving beyond digital-asset trading.

For Ethereum, the long-term opportunity depends on maintaining the confidence of developers, users and institutions while continuing to improve the network.

CryptoNewsOnlineHub Perspective

Ethereum’s decision to delay Glamsterdam is a reminder that responsible blockchain development requires more than delivering new features on schedule.

The proposed upgrade aims to improve network efficiency, but the discovery of smart-contract compatibility risks shows why gas accounting changes must be examined carefully.

The most important aspect of the announcement is that the issues were identified during testing, before the planned Hoodi deployment proceeded.

This gives developers an opportunity to examine affected contracts, revise unsafe assumptions and determine whether the protocol specifications need further adjustments.

CryptoNewsOnlineHub believes that this development should be viewed as a preventive security measure rather than evidence of an Ethereum network failure.

However, the delay also highlights the complexity of maintaining compatibility across a decentralised ecosystem containing thousands of applications and interconnected services.

Ethereum’s long-term success will depend on its ability to combine scalability, security and decentralisation without creating unexpected risks for existing users.

The next meaningful milestone will not simply be the announcement of a new activation date. It will be evidence that the identified problems have been addressed and that the upgrade can proceed with confidence.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why has Ethereum delayed the Glamsterdam upgrade?

The Ethereum Foundation delayed the next stage of the upgrade after ChainSecurity identified smart contracts that could become vulnerable under proposed changes to gas accounting. Developers are reviewing the affected assumptions before proceeding with further Hoodi testnet testing.

What are EIP-8037 and EIP-8038?

EIP-8037 proposes changes to state creation gas costs and introduces separate state-gas accounting. EIP-8038 updates gas costs associated with accessing and modifying blockchain state. Both are part of the proposed Glamsterdam upgrade.

Has Ethereum’s mainnet been hacked?

No. The announcement concerns potential vulnerabilities in certain smart contracts after the proposed upgrade. It is not a report of a successful attack on Ethereum’s main network.

What is the Hoodi testnet?

Hoodi is a public Ethereum test network used by developers and infrastructure operators to test protocol upgrades before potential mainnet deployment.

Will the Glamsterdam delay affect ETH prices?

It may influence market sentiment, but a testnet delay does not automatically determine ETH’s price. Investor demand, network activity, liquidity, staking and wider market conditions remain important factors.

What should Ethereum developers do now?

Developers should review contracts that rely on gas assumptions involving failed calls, storage changes and gas remaining after execution. They should also follow the Ethereum Foundation’s published guidance and report any affected code.

Final Takeaway

Ethereum’s Glamsterdam upgrade has encountered a significant security-related delay after researchers identified potential compatibility problems involving smart-contract gas accounting.

The Ethereum Foundation’s decision to postpone the Hoodi testnet fork gives developers additional time to investigate the affected contracts and determine whether changes to the protocol specifications are necessary.

Although the delay postpones an important stage of Ethereum’s scaling roadmap, it also demonstrates the value of identifying potential problems before a major upgrade reaches the main network.

For Ethereum, the challenge remains clear: increase network efficiency without compromising the security, reliability and decentralisation that support its ecosystem.

The next stage of Glamsterdam will be judged not by how quickly it launches, but by whether it delivers its intended improvements safely.