I've written about the evolution of the signature size in Bitcoin over the years.
@0xb10c "When this changed in the OpenSSL library, it caused a chain-split where nodes with a newer OpenSSL version split from nodes using an older version of the library."
AFAIK, there was no actual chain split, just the potential for a chain split discovered by sipa and prevented by the adoption of BIP66. See: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-July/009697.html
Also AFAIK, OpenSSL encoding wasn't changed until after BIP66 adoption.
(The rest of the article was great, thanks for writing it!)
BIP66 mentions that some nodes rejected the chain after an OpenSSL upgrade: "When this changed in OpenSSL 1.0.0p and 1.0.1k, it made some nodes reject the chain.". I wasn't around at the time, though.
This mentions that e.g. self-compiled versions were affected, but not the official releases.
I'm clarifying this in the article.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!