Ethereum developers have postponed Glamsterdam’s Hoodi test after researchers flagged gas-accounting changes that could disrupt existing contracts. The delay puts contract compatibility ahead of the next network rehearsal, with ChainSecurity reporting potentially affected examples and no confirmed mainnet activation date.
Hoodi activation stops while developers investigate
Ethereum developers postponed the Glamsterdam upgrade on Hoodi during Thursday’s All Core Devs Execution meeting, according to CoinDesk. Activation had been scheduled for Oct. 26 at 17:42:48 UTC. A planned Hoodi gas-limit increase to 200 million was postponed as well.
The immediate concern is how proposed gas rules would interact with contracts already deployed on Ethereum. Cointelegraph reported that the Ethereum Foundation announced the delay to give developers time to investigate those interactions. The issue concerns compatibility between existing contract logic and a changed execution environment, rather than simply whether the upgrade software can activate.
Refunded gas could change the outcome of failed calls
ChainSecurity’s analysis centers on EIP-8037 together with EIP-8038, according to CoinDesk. EIP-8037 changes the accounting for creating database records, with the aim of constraining database growth as Ethereum expands transaction capacity. The security concern emerges from how that accounting affects execution after a contract call fails.
A contract can catch a failed call and continue, potentially recording the failure or preventing another attempt. Some existing safeguards depend on insufficient gas remaining to finish that processing, so the transaction reverses instead. CoinDesk reported that Glamsterdam could return gas when certain record-creation changes are reversed, leaving the calling contract able to complete actions that previously could not finish.
According to Cointelegraph, an attacker can cause a legitimate operation to fail by supplying insufficient gas, a technique known as insufficient gas griefing. If a contract then treats the failed attempt as final, it could remove a claim or prevent a retry. The important distinction is between an operation failing temporarily and the contract permanently changing what the user can do afterward.
The findings extend beyond failure-handling logic
The proposed rules could also cause failures by increasing the gas required for an otherwise valid operation. CoinDesk reported ChainSecurity’s calculation that creating a storage slot could require 110,020 gas after a separate allowance is depleted, compared with 22,100 under the existing rules. A contract’s established execution budget might therefore become inadequate.
Separately, Cointelegraph reported that ChainSecurity was working with projects on responsible disclosure after finding 13 examples of existing contracts potentially affected by the changes. The firm did not name those projects or publish details of the examples. CoinDesk said the mechanisms had been demonstrated, but public evidence had not established an exploitable major production protocol or current exploitation through the proposed changes.
These findings make compatibility review broader than checking whether a contract accepts a transaction. Teams need to examine whether successful calls remain affordable and whether failed calls leave the intended state behind. Cointelegraph reported ChainSecurity’s qualification that some gas-dependent safeguards could still work, rather than all such checks becoming unreliable.
The reports describe a postponed rehearsal, not a mainnet date
The outlets agree that Hoodi’s scheduled activation will not proceed, but emphasize different consequences. CoinDesk explains the execution mechanics and the postponed gas-limit increase. Cointelegraph adds the responsible-disclosure update and reports that developers had been considering early December for mainnet, subject to successful Hoodi testing.
That tentative window is not a confirmed deployment commitment. CoinDesk explicitly reports that mainnet activation has no settled date. The Defiant’s brief account likewise says the mainnet decision remains open and adds that node operators are being directed toward software without the scheduled fork.
Both full reports place the delay after Glamsterdam’s Sepolia activation on Oct. 6 and ChainSecurity’s analysis on Oct. 13. Successful activation on a test network and compatibility with deployed application logic are distinct tests. The Hoodi postponement highlights why completing the former does not settle the latter.
Contract compatibility matters beyond protocol developers
Ethereum hosts $49.63 billion in DeFi total value locked, according to DefiLlama. That figure gives context to the importance of application compatibility, but it does not measure exposure to these findings. Neither full report identifies which share of deployed contracts or deposited assets could be affected.
The review also reaches infrastructure surrounding contracts. Cointelegraph reported an earlier Ethereum Foundation warning that fixed assumptions about gas could cause problems for wallets, indexers and gas estimators. Application execution and the tools used to prepare or interpret transactions therefore present separate compatibility checks.
For readers tracking projects through Coinvote’s new Ethereum token listings, the relevant distinction is between project visibility and technical readiness. A listing does not answer whether a contract depends on the gas assumptions described by ChainSecurity. The reported findings make contract-specific review more informative than a broad judgment about every Ethereum application.
Revised rules and disclosure will shape the next steps
The next milestones are a decision on the proposed gas rules, a replacement Hoodi schedule and clarification of mainnet planning. Cointelegraph reported that ChainSecurity urged developers to examine their contracts promptly. Its ongoing disclosure process may also clarify which implementations require changes, although affected projects remain unnamed.
Node operators have a separate operational issue: following the instruction reported by The Defiant to use software without the scheduled activation. For application teams, the unresolved issue is whether existing safeguards remain correct under the eventual rules. Those decisions, rather than the earlier tentative calendar, will determine what the next rehearsal needs to validate.
Market snapshot
| Asset | Price | 24h | 7d | Market cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bitcoin (BTC) | $81,659 | -0.7% | -0.4% | $1.64 trillion |
| Ethereum (ETH) | $2,402 | -1.1% | -1.6% | $293.41 billion |
CoinGecko data as of 2026-10-23 (UTC); DeFi TVL from DefiLlama: Ethereum $49.63 billion.
On Coinvote
- New Ethereum Tokens Listed Today: 2,927 projects tracked, 2 new listings in 7 days, 62 community votes today.
- Best Ethereum Meme Coins Today: 256 projects tracked, 0 new listings in 7 days, 13 community votes today.
FAQ
Why was Ethereum’s Glamsterdam upgrade on Hoodi postponed?
Researchers identified interactions between proposed gas-accounting changes and existing smart contracts. Developers delayed the test to investigate whether those changes could alter failure handling or make established gas budgets insufficient.
Does Glamsterdam have a confirmed Ethereum mainnet date?
No confirmed mainnet activation date was reported. Cointelegraph described early December as a window developers had considered, while CoinDesk and The Defiant emphasized that activation remained undecided.
Which Ethereum projects are affected by the gas findings?
ChainSecurity reported 13 potentially affected real-world examples but did not identify the projects. It was coordinating responsible disclosure, and public findings had not established an exploitable major production protocol.
Sources
- Cointelegraph: Ethereum delays Glamsterdam Hoodi testnet launch over security risks (2026-10-23)
- CoinDesk: Ethereum delays Glamsterdam test after security devs flag risk to existing contracts (2026-10-23)
- The Defiant: Ethereum Developers Cancel Oct. 26 Glamsterdam Upgrade on Hoodi (2026-10-22)
- CoinGecko (market data), DefiLlama (TVL), Coinvote listing and vote data
Written by the Coinvote news desk from reporting by Cointelegraph, CoinDesk and The Defiant. Not financial advice.
