I think that it is more likely that GCHQ employs ex-hackers, especially those who have been due to be prosecuted under Computer Misuse Act misdemeanors.

Most of these kids are perfect for indoctrination into such government agencies. They like to think they are James Bond.

My reasoning is that those names sound 'hackerish', whilst typical UK military code names are usually more about power and glory: http://www.alanharding.com/Military/codenames/operations.htm...

Codenames are computer assigned these days. There has been a history of operations being compromised because people were being overly descriptive with the codenames.

If you look at that list, the structure is quite obvious - so a program matching two words within broadcategories gives you pronounceable and memorable names, without the risk of a human giving it something too related to the content.

BIRDSONG and BIRDSTRIKE as twitter-related tech doesn't sound so computer assigned to me. Maybe they have an AI project not on the list :)

Based on what XorNot stated, maybe they just keep pressing the "generate new project" button until they find one they like.

GOODFELLA and GODFATHER seem a little too relatable as well.

> I think that it is more likely that GCHQ employs ex-hackers, especially those who have been due to be prosecuted under Computer Misuse Act misdemeanors.

Those people may get work in companies that do business with GCHQ/CESG, but I think it's unlikely they would be employed by GCHQ directly.

You use the word "misdemeanors" - that doesn't really have direct equivalent in English law. Do you mean something that is not a criminal offence? Or something that is criminal but not arrestable? Or something that is arrestable but which doesn't carry a prison sentence?