ACDC #189 · Execution proofs 8025 Excluded from Hegotá
AllCoreDevs - Consensus #189 · 2026-10-15
The experiment of verifying execution with ZK proofs continues outside the fork
Four proposals, including optional execution proofs (EIP-8025), were dropped from Hegotá candidacy because of insufficient support from CL teams, the Glamsterdam builder onboarding fix requested by Lido was rejected, and EIP-8205 was deferred to the next call.
Why it matters
zkEVM execution proofs will proceed on an experimental branch outside the official fork schedule for now, so the pace toward stateless verification depends on improvements to the spec process. Delegated staking protocols will have to guard against deposit race risk and front-running risk at the fork boundary with their own application-layer safeguards for the time being.
Decisions
- Builder fix rejected: The request to fix the builder onboarding race condition in Glamsterdam was rejected, and the Hoodi and mainnet specs go ahead unchanged. This means staking protocols must respond on their own at the application layer.
- EIP-8025 excluded: The optional execution proofs EIP-8025 was dropped from Hegotá candidacy. Support from CL teams fell short of the CFI bar, so the experiment continues on a separate branch.
- RowDAS excluded: RowDAS was dropped from Hegotá candidacy. Client support is low and current blob demand is small, so it was judged not urgent.
- EIP-8359 excluded: EIP-8359, which adds a client diversity reporting field to beacon blocks, was dropped from Hegotá candidacy. Client teams' assessments were not high.
- EIP-7716 excluded: EIP-7716, which weights penalties for simultaneous downtime, was dropped from Hegotá candidacy. Support was at the level of indifference, and there were concerns about touching beacon state.
- EIP-8205 deferred: The decision on EIP-8205, pre-registration of withdrawal credentials, was pushed to the next call. The scoping session on the next call will open with this agenda item and revisit it with a 5-minute timebox.
Discussion
Request to fix the builder onboarding deposit race condition
Lido raised the problem that at the Glamsterdam fork boundary a builder deposit could capture validator deposit funds, but the fix was rejected because the rollout was in its final stretch.
Outcome: Decision to reject the fix 00:37:55
Whether to give EIP-8025 optional execution proofs CFI
EL and CL developers clashed over whether the optional execution proofs feature qualifies for CFI, which it needs in order to be placed on the main spec branch.
Outcome: DFI decision 01:15:42
EIP-7716 anti-correlation attestation penalties
A proposal to increase penalties as more validators go down at the same time, in order to encourage client and infrastructure diversity, was discussed for inclusion in Hegotá.
Outcome: DFI decision 01:37:06
EIP-8205 withdrawal credential pre-registration
The discussion covered whether to block, at the protocol level, the long-standing vulnerability in which node operators front-run and capture delegated staking deposits.
Outcome: Deferred to next call 01:57:33
Glossary
- SFI: Scheduled for Inclusion, the state where inclusion in the fork is confirmed
- CFI: Considered for Inclusion, the state where the EIP is being reviewed on the premise that it will be included
- PFI: Proposed for Inclusion, the state where inclusion has been proposed and the EIP has been accepted as a candidate
- DFI: Declined for Inclusion, the state where the EIP has been excluded from the candidates for this fork
- Champion: The person responsible for the proposal who drives it forward
- EELS: The Python reference specification repository for the Ethereum execution layer (EL)
- Withdrawal credentials: Data that specifies where a validator's rewards and principal are withdrawn to. 0x00 is the legacy BLS key scheme
- PQ(post-quantum): The work of moving to cryptography that is safe against quantum computers as well