EIP complexity assessment

EIP-8279: Block Access List Byte Floor

Assessed in Hegotá. The score describes the EIP text available at the snapshot, not the EIP as it stands today.

ProspectiveHegotáSnapshot 2026-08-25PFI at snapshotLayers: execution

LLM Completescore 29

Human Draft PRscore 22 · Checklist revision 2· ethspecs/pm #108 (draft)

LLM · Checklist revision 22026-08-26 · Original snapshot · 29 Human · Checklist revision 2Draft PR · 22 CompareHuman vs LLM · same checklist revision

Evaluated on: 2026-08-26 · Spec revision: 2026-08-25 · ac450a4ab2 · Inclusion status at snapshot: PFI

Scope at the cutoff. Execution-layer assessment of the Draft EIP-8279 snapshot. The proposal extends the EIP-8131 transaction-content floor with per-transaction runtime metering of EIP-7928 BAL bytes, a static per-authorization BAL term, an SSTORE value-byte subtraction, runtime floor OOG checks, and a final max(execution_gas_used, floor_gas_used) charge. System calls and withdrawals remain outside the per-transaction floor and are left to EIP-7928's block-level item buffer.

29HighHigh

Evaluator: LLMChecklist v2
Confidence: Medium
Under-specified at assessment cutoff: Yes — 2 criteria affected
Plausible range: 29–30 (High)
Snapshot: 2026-08-25 · EIP revision ac450a4ab2 (2026-08-25)

Score bands · Checklist revision 2

Low <12
Medium 12–22
High ≥23

28 criteria scored 0–3 (4 in exceptional cases; cross-EIP interactions is uncapped); nominal maximum 84.

Complexity profile

Each segment is one criterion's contribution to the LLM total. Hover or focus a segment for its score and rationale.

Top complexity drivers

Cross-EIP interactions6
EVM Gas rule changes3
State-access ordering within opcode execution3
Patterns affecting pre-existing tests3

Under-specified at assessment cutoff: Yes

The EIP text available at the assessment cutoff left material behavior unresolved. The affected criteria and the plausible total range record that uncertainty.

Why: The SSTORE value-byte subtraction is not fully specified across nested call reverts. The text requires an immediate subtraction when a slot returns to its pre-transaction value, says counter changes are not rewound for reverted frames, and also limits the subtraction to the committed path. If a parent writes O to X and a child restores X to O but later reverts, the surviving BAL contains X while a retained child subtraction would omit its 32 value bytes and violate the stated upper-bound invariant.

Plausible total

29–30
recorded score 29 · plausible tiers High

Affected criteria (2)

New EVM gas refund (2)
Unspecified behavior requiring cross-client consensus (2)

Unresolved questions at the cutoff (1)

When an SSTORE subtraction occurs in a child frame that later reverts while an earlier parent-frame write remains live, must the 32-byte subtraction be journaled and undone, deferred until frame commit, or retained?

Notable ambiguities noted by the assessor (2)

The trigger table requires metering before BAL insertion or state mutation but does not enumerate each hook's exact position relative to all existing gas deductions and state reads; this matters at floor-OOG boundaries.
The phrase "on the committed path" is not backed by a specified mechanism for identifying commitment at the time an SSTORE returns to the pre-transaction value.

Criterion breakdown

EIP-8279 Hegotá: LLM criterion scores and rationale
Criterion	Score	Why this score	Evidence / uncertainty
Cross-EIP interactionsExceptional	6	The floor and its test matrix strongly depend on or coordinate with EIPs 2935, 3529, 4788, 4844, 4895, 7002, 7251, 7623, 7702, 7928, 7976, 7981, and 8131. The base score is 3; ten interactions beyond the first three yield three complete additional groups of three, adding 3 for a total of 6. Exceptional score: The rubric makes this row uncapped. Thirteen package-grounded interacting EIPs produce base 3 plus three increments for the nine complete additional- interaction positions beyond the first three; the remaining one does not form another group of three.	eip.md · Front matter > requires Explicitly requires EIPs 7623, 7702, 7928, 7976, 7981, and 8131. eip.md · Specification > System transactions and withdrawals Excludes EIP-2935, EIP-4788, EIP-7002, and EIP-7251 system calls and withdrawals from the per-transaction floor while relying on EIP-7928's buffer. eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Keys SSTORE byte subtraction to EIP-7928 BAL semantics rather than the EIP-3529 gas refund. eip.md · Motivation Inherits EIP-8131 coverage of EIP-4844 blob hashes and EIP-7702 authorizations while closing the runtime EIP-7928 BAL gap. supporting/eip-7928.md · Specification > Edge Cases (Normative) > EIP-4895 Identifies protocol withdrawals as EIP-4895 balance changes in the BAL. Confidence: High Uncertainty: Only interactions identified in the sealed package are counted; indirect protocol ancestry is not expanded further. Interacting EIPs: EIP-2935, EIP-3529, EIP-4788, EIP-4844, EIP-4895, EIP-7002, EIP-7251, EIP-7623, EIP-7702, EIP-7928, EIP-7976, EIP-7981, EIP-8131
EVM Gas rule changes	3	A new runtime gas-floor mechanism changes the existing EIP-7623/EIP-8131 charging shape, transaction OOG behavior, and final gas used across existing state-accessing operations, so existing gas tests are affected.	eip.md · Specification > Data meter and floor accumulator Introduces per-transaction bal_data_bytes and floor_gas_used counters, extends the floor at runtime, and raises OutOfGasError when the new floor exceeds tx.gas. eip.md · Specification > Final charge Sets tx.gasUsed to the maximum of execution gas and the runtime floor. Confidence: High Uncertainty: The SSTORE subtraction's revert handling is under-specified separately; it does not change that a broad new runtime gas mechanism exists.
State-access ordering within opcode execution	3	The new consensus-visible floor check is inserted before BAL growth or state mutation for a whole class of state-accessing operations. Its OOG boundary therefore changes whether an access or change occurs across many opcodes.	eip.md · Specification > Data meter and floor accumulator Requires meter_bal_data before the matching BAL insertion or state mutation, with OOG aborting the operation before an unpaid BAL byte exists. eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Applies this placement rule to cold account and storage access, SSTORE, value-bearing CALL and SELFDESTRUCT, and CREATE/CREATE2 nonce, balance, and code changes. Confidence: High Uncertainty: Exact placement relative to every existing gas deduction is not enumerated, increasing implementation uncertainty without reducing the anchored breadth.
Patterns affecting pre-existing tests	3	Existing gas-boundary and state-transition tests across diverse opcode, revert, creation, delegation, and transaction-content categories require reworking for the runtime floor and its new OOG points.	eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Changes floor/OOG behavior for account and storage access, SSTORE state transitions, calls, selfdestructs, and contract creation/deployment. eip.md · Test Cases Requires cases for the calldata-plus-SLOAD boundary, cold SSTORE, net-zero and repeated writes, and reverted value-bearing calls. Confidence: High Uncertainty: The package provides no existing suite inventory, but the normative trigger table establishes broad impact independent of suite organization.
Security risks	3	Correctness spans consensus-critical gas, BAL accounting, opcode execution, revert semantics, authorization preprocessing, and block-size DoS bounds. Undercounting or inconsistent OOG placement can break the bound or split clients, requiring extensive review and fuzzing.	eip.md · Security Considerations > Block-size bound Security depends on every transaction-contributed block byte being covered by floor_gas_used so the summed block bytes remain bounded by gas/64. eip.md · Rationale > Per-auth coverage is static Moves authorization BAL coverage to validation because runtime OOG during set_delegation would escape the EVM handler and could crash block processing. Confidence: High Uncertainty: The unresolved nested-revert subtraction creates a concrete risk, but score 3 is also supported by the otherwise specified multi-component invariant.
Edge/boundary conditions	3	Multiple mechanisms have elevated boundary matrices: equality around tx.gas, static versus execution domination, access warmth, value and account identity, SSTORE history, nested reverts, creation paths, and code length.	eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Conditions metering on cold/warm access, zero/non-zero value, distinct accounts, CREATE collision/success/endowment, deployed-code length, and first/return/repeated SSTORE transitions. eip.md · Security Considerations > Reverts Gives different persistence rules for accessed keys and for balance, nonce, code, and storage-value changes across reverted frames. Confidence: High Uncertainty: One nested-revert/SSTORE boundary is unresolved and is recorded as under-specification; the remaining specified conditions already meet score 3.
New EVM gas refundUnder-specified	2	This is a new state-dependent reduction of charged floor gas. It is narrower than the global refund counter but affects SSTORE/floor test outcomes and requires per-slot original/current-value tracking, satisfying score 2.	eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Subtracts 32 bytes from bal_data_bytes when SSTORE returns a slot to its pre-transaction value and recomputes floor_gas_used. eip.md · Rationale > Meter before; refund only when bytes leave the BAL Defines the subtraction by EIP-7928's no-op-write rule and explicitly distinguishes it from the EIP-3529 SSTORE gas refund. Confidence: Medium Uncertainty: The package conflicts on whether a subtraction made inside a later-reverted frame is retained or undone; that material gap is recorded below.
New or modified transaction validity mechanisms	2	The existing floor-validity rule is materially extended for authorization transactions and floor-dominated combinations. Existing cases need limited expected-validity updates, but no new transaction format or testing infrastructure is required.	eip.md · Specification > Static floor seed Adds 51 BAL bytes per EIP-7702 authorization to the static floor. eip.md · Specification > Final charge Continues to require tx.gas at least max(intrinsic, static_floor), with the newly enlarged static floor, while runtime metering can fail execution. Confidence: Medium Uncertainty: Runtime floor OOG is execution failure rather than upfront transaction invalidity; this score is based on the explicit static-floor validity change.
Performance risks	2	The overhead is integrated with broad existing execution and BAL collection, so it cannot be fully benchmarked in isolation, but the package shows simple arithmetic/counter work and does not establish substantial benchmark impact.	eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Adds counter updates and conditional per-slot tracking to every listed BAL- producing runtime operation, including variable-length deployed code. eip.md · Backwards Compatibility Requires tracing gas estimation to meter runtime BAL bytes for cold accesses, value-bearing calls, and deployments. Confidence: Medium Uncertainty: No implementation benchmark of the metering overhead is packaged.
Unspecified behavior requiring cross-client consensusUnder-specified	2	A constructible nested-frame sequence can charge a parent write, subtract in a child that restores the pre-transaction value, then revert the child so the parent write remains in the BAL. The text does not determine whether the subtraction must be undone, deferred, or retained. Agreement is required, but the gap is localized to SSTORE value-byte accounting across reverts.	eip.md · Security Considerations > Reverts Says neither bal_data_bytes nor the floor is rewound for discarded entries and says storage-value bytes charged in later-reverted frames remain charged. eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Requires an immediate 32-byte subtraction whenever SSTORE returns a slot to its pre-transaction value. eip.md · Rationale > Meter before; refund only when bytes leave the BAL Describes the subtraction as firing only on an explicit return to the pre-transaction value on the committed path, without specifying deferral or journal restoration when the containing frame later reverts. Confidence: High Uncertainty: The package contains no rule resolving this conflict; no external or later information was used.

Show 18 zero-score criteria

Zero-score criteria (Checklist revision 2)
Criterion	Why this score	Evidence / uncertainty
Added opcodes	No opcode is added.	eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Applies metering to an enumerated set of existing EVM operations. Uncertainty: The metering hook is internal client logic, not an instruction.
Modified opcodes	Existing operations acquire gas-floor hooks, but their non-gas results are not modified; this anchor explicitly excludes gas changes.	eip.md · Rationale > Counter, not a reservation States that the mechanism does not deduct execution gas and that execution gas accounting is untouched; it only updates and checks the floor. Uncertainty: OOG reachability is scored under gas and ordering anchors.
Added precompiles	No precompile is added.	eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Enumerates only existing opcode-triggered BAL contributions. Uncertainty: Precompile creation is outside the specified mechanism.
Modified precompiles	No pre-existing precompile is modified.	eip.md · Specification > Runtime data metering Contains no precompile logic or precompile gas-schedule change. Uncertainty: Calls to accounts are covered generically; no precompile-specific change is stated.
Added system contracts	No new system contract is introduced.	eip.md · Specification > System transactions and withdrawals Refers only to existing EIP-2935, EIP-4788, EIP-7002, and EIP-7251 system contract calls and excludes them from the per-transaction floor. Uncertainty: Existing system contracts are boundary cases, not additions.
Modified system contracts	The exclusion does not change any existing system contract's code, state transition, or call behavior, directly or indirectly.	eip.md · Specification > System transactions and withdrawals Leaves existing system-contract calls outside the new floor and continues to absorb their BAL bytes through EIP-7928's block-level buffer. Uncertainty: Their BAL-size interaction is counted under cross-EIP interactions.
Blob gas accounting changes	Blob versioned hashes are already part of the inherited static transaction floor, but EIP-8279 makes no change to blob gas accounting itself.	eip.md · Specification > Static floor seed Reuses EIP-8131 tx_floor as the static seed and adds BAL bytes per authorization; it specifies no blob-gas budget, price, or fee update. Uncertainty: No blob-gas mechanism is described in the proposal.
State gas accounting changes	The proposal changes the ordinary transaction gas floor, not StateGasCosts, per-state-byte write rates, a block state-gas budget, or its spill path.	eip.md · Rationale > Counter, not a reservation States that execution gas accounting is untouched and the counters only determine the transaction floor and final retained gas. Uncertainty: No state-gas construct defined by this anchor appears in the package.
New transaction types	No transaction type is added.	eip.md · Specification > Data meter and floor accumulator Explicitly states that no new transaction field or type is introduced. Uncertainty: Existing transaction types receive the floor rule.
New block / header fields	No block or header field is introduced by EIP-8279.	eip.md · Specification > Data meter and floor accumulator Makes the new values internal and non-persisted, with no block field. Uncertainty: EIP-7928's BAL commitment is baseline behavior, not a new field here.
Encoding changes (RLP/SSZ)	No transaction, block, or interface encoding changes are introduced.	eip.md · Specification > Data meter and floor accumulator Explicitly says neither counter is part of the signed transaction, RLP-encoded, gossiped, or persisted. Uncertainty: The EIP-7928 BAL encoding is an inherited input, not changed here.
Block syncing changes	No block RLP validation mechanism requiring client syncing is introduced.	eip.md · Specification > Data meter and floor accumulator Says the counters are not RLP-encoded, gossiped, or persisted and adds no block encoding rule. Uncertainty: EIP-7928 supplies the underlying BAL transport, but EIP-8279 does not modify that encoding surface.
New fork activation mechanism	Per-transaction initialization is not a fork-activation state or internal- variable modification under this anchor.	eip.md · Specification > Static floor seed Initializes per-transaction counters at the start of each execution. eip.md · Backwards Compatibility Requires a hard fork but specifies no activation-block state mutation. Uncertainty: The package gives no special activation-block procedure.
Engine API changes	The proposal requires no Engine API change beyond its EIP-7928 baseline.	eip.md · Specification > Data meter and floor accumulator Explicitly makes the two added counters internal and non-persisted; no Engine API field, version, endpoint, or communication mechanism is defined. Uncertainty: No Engine API section or new payload field appears in EIP-8279.
Transition-tool interface changes	No new transition-tool input or output field, and no interface mechanism, is specified.	eip.md · Specification > Data meter and floor accumulator Limits the added values to internal execution-environment counters and explicitly excludes signed, encoded, gossiped, and persisted fields. Uncertainty: Tool implementations must calculate the rule internally, but the package does not require an interface change.
New invariant on pre-existing tests	The proposal changes expected execution and gas outcomes, which is counted as test rework above, but introduces no new persisted artifact that unrelated pre-existing tests must additionally assert.	eip.md · Specification > Data meter and floor accumulator Declares both new counters internal and per-transaction, not signed, encoded, gossiped, or persisted. Uncertainty: The package does not describe harness-wide assertion policy; an internal counter alone does not establish a new assertion for every existing test.
New test-framework primitives	The specified cases do not establish a need for a new expectation type, modifier, or permanent framework primitive.	eip.md · Test Cases Expresses tests as ordinary transactions and expected gas, metered-byte, BAL, and success/revert outcomes. Uncertainty: The package contains no test-framework design, so only the absence of a demonstrated new primitive can be scored.
Cryptography	The proposal introduces or modifies no cryptographic mechanism.	eip.md · Specification > Constants Defines only byte sizes and a per-byte gas rate for arithmetic metering. Uncertainty: No cryptographic operation is in the proposal's scope.

Assessment provenance

Assessed EIP revision: ethereum/EIPs@ac450a4ab2 EIPS/eip-8279.md committed 2026-08-25 · information cutoff 2026-08-25T11:56:58Z
Current master · File history · blob 43a44216d4 · sha256 90d09fbcdadd
Rubric: Checklist revision 2 · ethspecs/pm@3d8c0128c5
Evaluator: gpt-5.6-sol at xhigh reasoning effort · isolation bubblewrap_one_eip_capsule_v1
Source record: Frozen research record research/tasks/08-hegota-prospective-complexity-assessment/outputs/assessments/hegota-pfi-2026-08-26/eip-8279.yaml · sha256 593c5f9f7de3
Supporting documents in the sealed package: supporting/eip-2935.md, supporting/eip-3529.md, supporting/eip-4788.md, supporting/eip-4844.md, supporting/eip-7002.md, supporting/eip-7251.md, supporting/eip-7623.md, supporting/eip-7702.md, supporting/eip-7928.md, supporting/eip-7976.md, supporting/eip-7981.md, supporting/eip-8131.md

Evaluated on: Not recorded

22MediumMedium

Evaluator: HumanChecklist v2
Confidence: Not recorded
Under-specified at assessment cutoff: Not recorded in the checklist
Checklist published: 2026-08-17
Source: open ethspecs/pm pull request #108 (draft)

Score bands · Checklist revision 2

Low <12
Medium 12–22
High ≥23

28 criteria scored 0–3 (4 in exceptional cases; cross-EIP interactions is uncapped); nominal maximum 84.

Complexity profile

Each segment is one criterion's contribution to the Human total. Hover or focus a segment for its score and rationale.

Top complexity drivers

EVM Gas rule changes3
Edge/boundary conditions3
Cross-EIP interactions3
State-access ordering within opcode execution2

Criterion breakdown

EIP-8279 Hegotá: Human criterion scores and rationale
Criterion	Score	Why this score	Notes
EVM Gas rule changes	3	A new floor mechanism folded into `tx.gasUsed = max(execution_gas_used, floor_gas_used)`, extending the floor family that the eip7623/eip7976/eip7981 suites actively test. Measured: an EELS prototype flips 384 fixture executions across the eip7623/7976/2780/8037/7778/7934/7954 gas suites.	—
Edge/boundary conditions	3	Nine runtime trigger rows x cold/warm x revert behavior x slot charge/refund toggling x the exact floor-binding boundary (`tx.gas == floor`) x the 7702 static seed — at least one mechanism with an elevated case count.	—
Cross-EIP interactions	3	Four coordination targets: EIP-7928 (the substrate being priced), the EIP-7623/7976/8131 calldata-floor chain (one mechanism), EIP-7702 (the static seed), and EIP-8037 (the gas-dimension split) — short of the six needed for an increment. EIP-2929 cold tracking and EIP-4758's trigger change are touchpoints, not coordinated test matrices.	—
State-access ordering within opcode execution	2	One uniform new abort point sits before every recordable access, and its position had to be settled (an access that aborts on the floor check must not commit its bytes, or settlement exceeds the gas limit). Measured: no existing BAL vectors change at all, so the re-derivation that anchors a 3 never materializes.	—
New or modified transaction validity mechanisms	2	Validation becomes `tx.gas >= max(intrinsic, static_floor)` with the new per-auth BAL term; existing validity tests in the 8131/7981 family need limited updates.	—
Patterns affecting pre-existing tests	2	The floor rarely binds for typical transactions. Measured: 384 of ~61,800 fixture executions fail, but they collapse to 11 test functions, all in floor/gas-boundary suites — a considerable but contrived category, dominated (336) by the two calldata-floor `test_transaction_validity` functions whose exact-boundary transactions now abort.	—
Security risks	2	A DoS-bound mechanism: an implementation error either reopens the 1.5 MB block-size bypass or aborts valid transactions; interacts with core gas metering; targeted review and fuzzing.	—
Performance risks	2	The meter itself is cheap, but the EIP redefines worst-case block composition — the bloatnet/worst-case benchmark suites that target exactly these vectors must be re-derived.	—
New EVM gas refund	1	The −32-byte meter refund for restored slots is deliberately distinct from the EIP-3529 gas refund and never touches the refund counter; a simple mechanism whose complexity is already scored under the gas-rule and ordering rows.	—
New test-framework primitives	1	The intrinsic/data-floor calculators already model the EIP-7623 floor family; they gain the per-authorization static seed term and byte-floor constants. Measured: the prototype suite needed only a small test-local scaffold helper beyond those extensions.	—
Unspecified behavior requiring cross-client consensus	1	Two details are unwritten — the fit with EIP-8037's two gas dimensions, and whether an aborting access counts its bytes — but both have an obvious intended reading that held up in the prototype (the byte floor extends the calldata floor inside the existing settlement `max`; the aborted access never commits).	—

Show 17 zero-score criteria

Zero-score criteria (Checklist revision 2)
Criterion	Why this score	Notes
Added opcodes	No rationale recorded.	—
Modified opcodes	No rationale recorded.	—
Added precompiles	No rationale recorded.	—
Modified precompiles	No rationale recorded.	—
Added system contracts	No rationale recorded.	—
Modified system contracts	No rationale recorded.	—
Blob gas accounting changes	No rationale recorded.	—
State gas accounting changes	No rationale recorded.	—
New transaction types	No rationale recorded.	—
New block / header fields	No rationale recorded.	—
Encoding changes (RLP/SSZ)	No rationale recorded.	—
Block syncing changes	No rationale recorded.	—
New fork activation mechanism	No rationale recorded.	—
Engine API changes	No rationale recorded.	—
Transition-tool interface changes	No rationale recorded.	—
New invariant on pre-existing tests	No rationale recorded.	—
Cryptography	No rationale recorded.	—

Assessment provenance

Rubric: Checklist revision 2 · ethspecs/pm@3d8c0128c5
Evaluator: STEEL team · ethspecs/pm complexity_assessments
Source record: Open draft pull request #108: Add EIP-8279 complexity assessment · checklist at 9674b1fd58 · updated 2026-08-17
blob 7c3e42a49a · sha256 a26230f73a46
Research record: research/tasks/09-hegota-human-assessment-snapshot/outputs/assessments/eip-8279.yaml · sha256 ecdc047d8ba4

Both assessments applied Checklist revision 2 (28 criteria) to EIP-8279 in Hegotá. Δ is LLM minus Human.

Using the latest scored LLM evaluation for this checklist: 2026-08-26 · spec 2026-08-25 · ac450a4ab2. The Human and LLM assessments may use different spec revisions.

LLM29High

Human22Medium

Δ total+7Tiers differ: High vs Medium

Criteria21/28agree exactly · 6 differ by 1 · 1 differ by 2+

Complexity profiles side by side

LLM

Human

Largest disagreements: Cross-EIP interactions (+3), State-access ordering within opcode execution (+1), New EVM gas refund (+1), Patterns affecting pre-existing tests (+1), New test-framework primitives (−1)

Show differences only (7 criteria)

Per-criterion scores, Human versus LLM, ordered by the size of the difference
Criterion	LLM	Human	Δ	Agreement	Rationale from each source
Cross-EIP interactions	6	3	+3	Differ by 2+	Show rationale LLM The floor and its test matrix strongly depend on or coordinate with EIPs 2935, 3529, 4788, 4844, 4895, 7002, 7251, 7623, 7702, 7928, 7976, 7981, and 8131. The base score is 3; ten interactions beyond the first three yield three complete additional groups of three, adding 3 for a total of 6. Human Four coordination targets: EIP-7928 (the substrate being priced), the EIP-7623/7976/8131 calldata-floor chain (one mechanism), EIP-7702 (the static seed), and EIP-8037 (the gas-dimension split) — short of the six needed for an increment. EIP-2929 cold tracking and EIP-4758's trigger change are touchpoints, not coordinated test matrices.
State-access ordering within opcode execution	3	2	+1	Differ by 1	Show rationale LLM The new consensus-visible floor check is inserted before BAL growth or state mutation for a whole class of state-accessing operations. Its OOG boundary therefore changes whether an access or change occurs across many opcodes. Human One uniform new abort point sits before every recordable access, and its position had to be settled (an access that aborts on the floor check must not commit its bytes, or settlement exceeds the gas limit). Measured: no existing BAL vectors change at all, so the re-derivation that anchors a 3 never materializes.
New EVM gas refund	2	1	+1	Differ by 1	Show rationale LLM This is a new state-dependent reduction of charged floor gas. It is narrower than the global refund counter but affects SSTORE/floor test outcomes and requires per-slot original/current-value tracking, satisfying score 2. Human The −32-byte meter refund for restored slots is deliberately distinct from the EIP-3529 gas refund and never touches the refund counter; a simple mechanism whose complexity is already scored under the gas-rule and ordering rows.
Patterns affecting pre-existing tests	3	2	+1	Differ by 1	Show rationale LLM Existing gas-boundary and state-transition tests across diverse opcode, revert, creation, delegation, and transaction-content categories require reworking for the runtime floor and its new OOG points. Human The floor rarely binds for typical transactions. Measured: 384 of ~61,800 fixture executions fail, but they collapse to 11 test functions, all in floor/gas-boundary suites — a considerable but contrived category, dominated (336) by the two calldata-floor `test_transaction_validity` functions whose exact-boundary transactions now abort.
New test-framework primitives	0	1	−1	Differ by 1	Show rationale LLM The specified cases do not establish a need for a new expectation type, modifier, or permanent framework primitive. Human The intrinsic/data-floor calculators already model the EIP-7623 floor family; they gain the per-authorization static seed term and byte-floor constants. Measured: the prototype suite needed only a small test-local scaffold helper beyond those extensions.
Security risks	3	2	+1	Differ by 1	Show rationale LLM Correctness spans consensus-critical gas, BAL accounting, opcode execution, revert semantics, authorization preprocessing, and block-size DoS bounds. Undercounting or inconsistent OOG placement can break the bound or split clients, requiring extensive review and fuzzing. Human A DoS-bound mechanism: an implementation error either reopens the 1.5 MB block-size bypass or aborts valid transactions; interacts with core gas metering; targeted review and fuzzing.
Unspecified behavior requiring cross-client consensus	2	1	+1	Differ by 1	Show rationale LLM A constructible nested-frame sequence can charge a parent write, subtract in a child that restores the pre-transaction value, then revert the child so the parent write remains in the BAL. The text does not determine whether the subtraction must be undone, deferred, or retained. Agreement is required, but the gap is localized to SSTORE value-byte accounting across reverts. Human Two details are unwritten — the fit with EIP-8037's two gas dimensions, and whether an aborting access counts its bytes — but both have an obvious intended reading that held up in the prototype (the byte floor extends the calldata floor inside the existing settlement `max`; the aborted access never commits).
Added opcodes	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM No opcode is added. Human No rationale recorded.
Modified opcodes	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM Existing operations acquire gas-floor hooks, but their non-gas results are not modified; this anchor explicitly excludes gas changes. Human No rationale recorded.
Added precompiles	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM No precompile is added. Human No rationale recorded.
Modified precompiles	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM No pre-existing precompile is modified. Human No rationale recorded.
Added system contracts	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM No new system contract is introduced. Human No rationale recorded.
Modified system contracts	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM The exclusion does not change any existing system contract's code, state transition, or call behavior, directly or indirectly. Human No rationale recorded.
EVM Gas rule changes	3	3	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM A new runtime gas-floor mechanism changes the existing EIP-7623/EIP-8131 charging shape, transaction OOG behavior, and final gas used across existing state-accessing operations, so existing gas tests are affected. Human A new floor mechanism folded into `tx.gasUsed = max(execution_gas_used, floor_gas_used)`, extending the floor family that the eip7623/eip7976/eip7981 suites actively test. Measured: an EELS prototype flips 384 fixture executions across the eip7623/7976/2780/8037/7778/7934/7954 gas suites.
Blob gas accounting changes	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM Blob versioned hashes are already part of the inherited static transaction floor, but EIP-8279 makes no change to blob gas accounting itself. Human No rationale recorded.
State gas accounting changes	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM The proposal changes the ordinary transaction gas floor, not StateGasCosts, per-state-byte write rates, a block state-gas budget, or its spill path. Human No rationale recorded.
New transaction types	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM No transaction type is added. Human No rationale recorded.
New or modified transaction validity mechanisms	2	2	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM The existing floor-validity rule is materially extended for authorization transactions and floor-dominated combinations. Existing cases need limited expected-validity updates, but no new transaction format or testing infrastructure is required. Human Validation becomes `tx.gas >= max(intrinsic, static_floor)` with the new per-auth BAL term; existing validity tests in the 8131/7981 family need limited updates.
New block / header fields	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM No block or header field is introduced by EIP-8279. Human No rationale recorded.
Encoding changes (RLP/SSZ)	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM No transaction, block, or interface encoding changes are introduced. Human No rationale recorded.
Block syncing changes	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM No block RLP validation mechanism requiring client syncing is introduced. Human No rationale recorded.
New fork activation mechanism	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM Per-transaction initialization is not a fork-activation state or internal- variable modification under this anchor. Human No rationale recorded.
Engine API changes	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM The proposal requires no Engine API change beyond its EIP-7928 baseline. Human No rationale recorded.
Transition-tool interface changes	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM No new transition-tool input or output field, and no interface mechanism, is specified. Human No rationale recorded.
New invariant on pre-existing tests	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM The proposal changes expected execution and gas outcomes, which is counted as test rework above, but introduces no new persisted artifact that unrelated pre-existing tests must additionally assert. Human No rationale recorded.
Performance risks	2	2	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM The overhead is integrated with broad existing execution and BAL collection, so it cannot be fully benchmarked in isolation, but the package shows simple arithmetic/counter work and does not establish substantial benchmark impact. Human The meter itself is cheap, but the EIP redefines worst-case block composition — the bloatnet/worst-case benchmark suites that target exactly these vectors must be re-derived.
Edge/boundary conditions	3	3	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM Multiple mechanisms have elevated boundary matrices: equality around tx.gas, static versus execution domination, access warmth, value and account identity, SSTORE history, nested reverts, creation paths, and code length. Human Nine runtime trigger rows x cold/warm x revert behavior x slot charge/refund toggling x the exact floor-binding boundary (`tx.gas == floor`) x the 7702 static seed — at least one mechanism with an elevated case count.
Cryptography	0	0	0	Agree	Show rationale LLM The proposal introduces or modifies no cryptographic mechanism. Human No rationale recorded.

Compare EIP-8279 with other assessments All Hegotá assessments

Criterion legend and glossary

Every stacked bar, comparison matrix, and criterion table on this site uses the same criterion colours, abbreviations, and order. Colour marks the criterion group; the abbreviation and name identify the criterion. Scores are 0–3 per criterion (4 is exceptional; cross-EIP interactions is uncapped).

EVM surface

Opcodes, precompiles, and system contracts that are added or modified.

OP+
Added opcodes
Introduces new opcodes
Score anchors
0
No new opcodes are introduced.
1
A new simple opcode is introduced (no data portion, no complex stack mechanics, and a constant gas cost).
2
Multiple new simple opcodes are introduced, or a single new complex opcode is introduced (has data portion, or complex stack mechanics, or a dynamic gas cost).
3
Multiple new opcodes are introduced, and at least one of them is complex (has data portion, or complex stack mechanics, or a dynamic gas cost).
- Cryptography opcodes are not considered complex by default. Refer to the "Cryptography" section for a separate assessment.
Modified opcodes
Modifies pre-existing opcodes
Score anchors
0
No pre-existing opcode modifications are introduced.
3
At least one pre-existing opcode's behavior is modified (not including gas changes) or a pre-existing opcode is deprecated.
PC+
Added precompiles
Introduces new precompiles
Score anchors
0
No new precompiles are introduced.
1
A new simple precompile is introduced (constant input length, constant gas cost).
2
Multiple new simple precompiles are introduced, or a single new complex precompile is introduced (dynamic input length or dynamic gas cost).
3
Multiple new precompiles are introduced, and at least one of them is complex (dynamic input length or dynamic gas cost).
- Cryptography precompiles are not considered complex by default. Refer to the "Cryptography" for a separate assessment.
Modified precompiles
Modifies pre-existing precompiles logic or gas-accounting
Score anchors
0
No pre-existing precompiles are modified.
1
At least one pre-existing precompile has its gas schedule modified.
2
Multiple pre-existing precompiles have their gas schedule modified, or a single pre-existing precompile has its behavior modified.
3
The behavior of multiple pre-existing precompiles, or a single complex pre-existing precompile modified.
Added system contracts
Introduces new system contract, stateful or not
Score anchors
0
No new system contracts are introduced.
1
A new system contract is introduced that is not stateful nor does it trigger a new system action (e.g. requests to the consensus layer).
2
Multiple new system contracts are introduced or a single new system contract that is either stateful or triggers a new system action (e.g. requests to the consensus layer).
3
Multiple new system contracts are introduced and at least one of them is either stateful or triggers a new system action (e.g. requests to the consensus layer).
Modified system contracts
Modifies pre-existing system contracts
Score anchors
0
No modifications to pre-existing system contracts are introduced, directly or indirectly.
1
Does not directly modify any system contract, but its behavior has minor indirect effects on one or more system contracts.
2
Does not directly modify any system contract, but its behavior has major indirect effects on one or more system contracts.
3
At least one pre-existing system contract code or state is modified, which would involve irregular state transition or a similarly complex transition methodology.

Gas and accounting

Execution, blob, and state gas rules, refunds, and where charges happen inside opcodes.

EVM Gas rule changes
New EVM gas accounting rules
Score anchors
0
No gas accounting changes.
1
Existing gas accounting mechanism is updated.
2
A new gas accounting mechanism is introduced but it does not affect existing mechanisms nor does it affect existing tests.
3
A new gas accounting mechanism is introduced and affects existing mechanisms which in turn affect existing tests.
ORD
State-access ordering within opcode execution · Checklist revision 2 only
Changes *where inside an opcode's execution* state is accessed, or where gas is charged relative to that access. Because a state access is recorded in the block-level access list only if execution had enough gas to reach it, this ordering is consensus-critical: moving it changes the BAL at every gas boundary of every affected opcode.
Score anchors
0
No change to where state is accessed, or to where gas is charged relative to a state access, within any opcode.
1
A single opcode's state-access or gas-charge ordering changes.
2
Multiple opcodes' ordering changes, or a new state-accessing operation is introduced whose position in the order must be settled.
3
The ordering rule changes for a whole class of state-accessing opcodes at once, or what counts as a recordable state access is redefined — requiring existing BAL vectors to be re-derived across opcodes and forks.
- Distinct from "Modified opcodes", which asks whether an opcode's **result** changed. This row asks about the **path to the result**, which is observable even when the result is identical. An EIP can be 0 on that row and 3 on this one.
- Score changes **to** the ordering. Do not score the fact that state accesses are observable — they always are.
- Each boundary must be re-tested against every other dimension that can change the answer (cold/warm, static/non-static, delegated/direct, revert/success), so the case count grows multiplicatively rather than additively. Note this explicitly under Special Considerations.
Blob gas accounting changes
New Blob gas accounting rules which potentially affect pre-existing tests
Score anchors
0
No blob gas accounting changes.
1
Existing blob gas accounting mechanism is updated.
2
A new blob gas accounting mechanism is introduced but it does not affect existing mechanisms nor does it affect existing tests.
3
A new blob gas accounting mechanism is introduced and affects existing mechanisms which in turn affect existing tests.
SGAS
State gas accounting changes · Checklist revision 2 only
New state gas accounting rules. State gas is the cost of *writing* state, as opposed to accessing or executing it: `StateGasCosts`, `COST_PER_STATE_BYTE`, the block-level state gas budget, and the spill path into execution gas.
Score anchors
0
No state gas accounting changes.
1
An existing state gas cost or `STATE_BYTES_PER_*` rate is adjusted.
2
A new state-gas-charging site is introduced, or the block-level state gas budget or reservoir allocation is modified.
3
A new state gas charging mechanism is introduced, or the spill interaction between state gas and execution gas is modified, affecting existing gas tests.
- Harder to test than blob gas: the spill path means state gas cannot be metered independently of execution gas, and some costs (e.g. `NEW_ACCOUNT`) are state-dependent.
New EVM gas refund
New gas-refund mechanism
Score anchors
0
No new gas-refund mechanisms are introduced.
1
A new simple gas-refund mechanism is introduced that does not affect either existing tests or existing gas-refund mechanisms.
2
A new complex gas-refund mechanism is introduced or a simple mechanism that affects existing tests or existing gas-refund mechanisms.
3
A new complex gas-refund mechanism is introduced that affects existing tests or existing gas-refund mechanisms.

Blocks, transactions, and encoding

Transaction types and validity, block and header fields, encodings, syncing, and activation-time changes.

New transaction types
Introduces a new transaction type
Score anchors
0
No new transaction types are introduced.
3
A new transaction type is introduced.
New or modified transaction validity mechanisms
Creates new or modifies pre-existing transaction types' validation mechanisms
Score anchors
0
No changes are introduced to the validity rules of existing transaction types or to their intrinsic gas cost calculation.
1
Minor adjustments are introduced to validity rules or intrinsic gas cost calculation, but they do not significantly affect existing tests.
2
Changes to validity rules or intrinsic gas cost calculation affect existing tests, but require only limited updates to test cases and no redesign of the testing infrastructure.
3
Changes to validity rules or intrinsic gas cost calculation require extensive rework or redesign of the tests or testing infrastructure.
New block / header fields
Introduces new block or block header fields
Score anchors
0
No new block or header fields are introduced.
3
A new block or header field is introduced.
ENC
Encoding changes (RLP/SSZ)
Introduces encoding changes at the transaction/block/interfaces level
Score anchors
0
No encoding changes are introduced at the transaction, block, or interfaces levels.
3
An encoding change is introduced at transaction, block or interfaces level (e.g. RLP -> SSZ).
- "Interfaces level" includes the Engine API. Score an Engine API encoding change (e.g. JSON -> SSZ) here.
Block syncing changes
Modifies block RLP validation mechanisms that require test client syncing.
Score anchors
0
No new RLP validation mechanism is introduced.
1
A single simple RLP validation mechanism is introduced.
2
Multiple simple RLP validation mechanisms are introduced or a single complex one.
3
Multiple RLP validation mechanisms are introduced and at least one of them is deemed complex.
ACT
New fork activation mechanism
Modifies state, internal variables, or similar, at the fork activation block
Score anchors
0
No state modifications, internal variables or similar are modified at the fork activation block.
3
Either a state modification or internal variables are modified at the fork activation block.
- Initialization of new internal variable is not considered a modification.

Client interfaces

Engine API and transition-tool interface changes.

Engine API changes
Introduces new fields to the Engine API directives
Score anchors
0
No new fields or communication mechanisms are introduced to the Engine API.
1
A single new field is introduced in one of the Engine API endpoints.
2
Multiple fields are introduced to one or multiple Engine API end points, or a new Engine API end-point is introduced.
3
Multiple fields are introduced to one or multiple Engine API end points and a new Engine API end-point is introduced.
Engine API encoding changes · Checklist revision 1 only
Engine API encoding changes (the revision-1 template defines no anchor text for this row).
T8N
Transition-tool interface changes
Modifies or adds new fields to the transition tool interface.
Score anchors
0
No modifications to the transition tool interface are required.
1
A single new field needs to be introduced to the transition tool interface.
2
Multiple new fields or a new mechanism has to be introduced to the transition tool interface.
3
Multiple new fields and a new mechanism has to be introduced to the transition tool interface.
- Special consideration must be paid to this section if the EIP introduces a mechanism that requires the state transition tool to be aware whether the block it is processing is the fork-activation block.

Testing impact

Rework, new invariants, and new primitives required in the test framework.

Patterns affecting pre-existing tests
Implements a new validation mechanism or rule that translates in reworking pre-existing tests
Score anchors
0
No pre-existing tests are affected by this change.
1
Minor subset of existing tests are affected by this change.
2
Considerable subset of existing tests are affected by this change but involves only a contrived category of tests.
3
Major subset of existing tests are affected, including diverse category of tests (benchmarks, static, multiple forks, etc.).
INV
New invariant on pre-existing tests · Checklist revision 2 only
Tests that are **not about this EIP** must nonetheless assert something this EIP produces. Their logic does not change; they gain a new thing to check.
Score anchors
0
Pre-existing tests assert nothing new.
1
A narrow, contrived category of pre-existing tests gains a new assertion.
2
A broad category gains a new assertion, applied mechanically.
3
Every test in the fork gains the assertion regardless of what it tests, and pre-fork vectors must be re-derived to satisfy it.
- Paired with the row above, and easy to confuse with it. "Patterns affecting pre-existing tests" asks whether existing tests must be **reworked**; this row asks whether they must **additionally assert something new**. Score both — an EIP can be low on one and high on the other.
New test-framework primitives · Checklist revision 2 only
Requires new abstractions in the test framework itself — expectation types, modifiers, helpers — beyond writing test functions with what already exists.
Score anchors
0
Existing test primitives suffice.
1
Existing primitives need minor extension.
2
New expectation or modifier primitives are required, reusable within this EIP's own test suite.
3
New framework-level primitives are required that become a permanent part of the framework and are used by other EIPs' tests.

Risk and validation

Security, performance, boundary conditions, and cryptography that need validation.

Security risks
Introduces or modifies mechanisms that could compromise the security of the chain, users, validators, or other stakeholders, if not implemented properly.
Score anchors
0
No new mechanisms are introduced that could pose a security risk.
1
The introduced mechanisms are self-contained, can be validated in isolation, and do not alter existing invariants that could pose a security risk for any stakeholders.
2
The introduced mechanisms interact with a limited number of existing components, slightly altering their security assumptions and requiring a targeted security review or fuzzing.
3
The introduced mechanisms interact with multiple existing components, including critical ones, substantially altering their security assumptions and requiring an extensive security review and fuzzing.
Performance risks
Introduces or modifies mechanisms and requires performance validation.
Score anchors
0
No new mechanisms are introduced that require performance validation.
1
The introduced mechanisms can be benchmarked in isolation and do not affect existing performance behavior.
2
The introduced mechanisms cannot be fully benchmarked in isolation, but they only have a limited impact on the existing performance benchmarks.
3
The introduced mechanisms cannot be benchmarked in isolation and have a substantial impact on existing performance benchmarks or have complex interactions with existing mechanisms.
Edge/boundary conditions
Feature contains edge/boundary conditions.
Score anchors
0
No discernible edge cases or boundary conditions are introduced.
1
A single edge-case or boundary-condition prone mechanism is introduced.
2
Multiple edge-case or boundary-condition prone mechanisms are introduced, but none of them requires an elevated number of cases to test.
3
Multiple edge-case or boundary-condition prone mechanisms are introduced and at least one of them requires an elevated number of cases to test.
Cryptography
Introduces new cryptography mechanisms or modifies existing functionality that involves cryptography
Score anchors
0
No cryptography mechanisms are introduced.
1
A new cryptography mechanism is introduced but it is a well known mechanism that is known to have vast resources to aid on its testing.
2
Multiple new cryptography mechanisms are introduced that are well-known or a single but novel mechanism is introduced that is either untested or has limited resources.
3
Multiple new cryptography mechanisms are introduced and at least one of them is a novel mechanism.

Coordination

Cross-EIP interactions and behavior that clients must agree on before tests exist.

XEIP
Cross-EIP interactions
Introduces or modifies mechanisms that affect other EIPs in either the same or past forks.
Score anchors
0
Fully self-contained EIP that does not depend on, modify, or conflict with any other EIP.
1
The EIP interacts with one or more other EIPs in a non-critical and limited way but can be tested independently for the most part.
2
The EIP depends on or modifies one or more other EIPs such that coordinated testing and consideration is required, but interactions are limited in scope and not complex.
3
The EIP has strong interdependencies with multiple EIPs, requiring extensive coordinated cross-EIP testing as well as potential re-design of existing test vectors.
- +1 for every 3 additional interacting EIPs beyond the first 3, each of which requires its own coordinated test cases. List the EIPs in the rationale.
- This row is intentionally uncapped, unlike every other anchor: each interacting EIP is another axis of the test matrix, so a ceiling would make a 12-EIP product indistinguishable from a 3-EIP one.
UNSP
Unspecified behavior requiring cross-client consensus · Checklist revision 2 only
The EIP text does not determine the answer for cases a test can construct. Clients must agree on a previously unspecified detail before tests can be baselined. The cost here is coordination and re-baselining, not test writing.
Score anchors
0
The EIP text determines the answer for every case a test could construct.
1
A few details are unspecified but have an obvious intended reading.
2
Details require client agreement before tests can be written, but they are localized.
3
A previously unspecified *and previously unobservable* behavior becomes consensus-critical; expect tests to be re-baselined on each round of EIP amendment.
- Score this from the EIP's state at assessment time: whether it has client implementations, whether it has been through a devnet, and how many open questions remain on its discussion thread.