As we routinely document our personal lives on Facebook and Twitter — our political views, work habits, family, what we ate for lunch — it might seem like our lives have become an open book. The ability of cyberspace to collect and store information about ourselves has overpowered our poor efforts to contain it.

But does that mean we should give up? Does our use of social media presume we have abandoned all expectations of privacy?

In a word, no. With the exception of information on public sites, we still have the right to demand some level of confidentiality online, however meager. We use unique log-ins and passwords for personal accounts to ensure that we share our information with those we choose — and only those we choose.

This distinction seems to be lost by some employers, including the Honolulu and Maui police departments, who apparently believe that anything a person puts up on a social media site is de facto public information. They want to be able to require job applicants and/or employees to surrender log-ins and passwords to personal social media accounts so they can scour the account for heaven knows what.

A sensible bill before the state Legislature would block this unwarranted intrusion. House Bill 713, House Draft 2, forbids employers from requesting or requiring that employees or job applicants hand over the information. It prohibits "shoulder surfing," in which an employee would access a personal account while the employer watches. It would also prevent employers from disciplining or taking punitive action against an employee or prospective employee who does not comply with such requests.

The bill takes care not to tread on the legitimate concerns of employers. It distinguishes "personal accounts" from those used for "any business purpose of the employer," which would not have the same protection. It protects an employer’s right to limited access to a personal account for an investigation of an employee’s misconduct or violation of the law.

An earlier version of the bill exempted law enforcement from the ban, but the House Judiciary Committee removed that exemption — and rightly so. The HPD argued that "vital information regarding the ethical and moral character of an applicant can be found through the social media." Possibly. But that’s not an adequate reason to allow an unrestricted fishing expedition. HPD already puts its recruits through extensive background checks, including physical and psychological exams, that go well beyond the norm. That should be enough.

Rep. Karl Rhoads, chairman of the Judiciary Committee said, "My concern is that being able to get into people’s social media accounts is very close to going through people’s mail."

He is right. It’s very close — close enough to warrant caution.

Already, employers using sophisticated data-scouring software can access reams of information about a person on sites already publicly accessible. Such efforts could even expose an employer to a lawsuit by an unsuccessful applicant, if the search uncovers information that by law the employer cannot consider — the race and age of the applicant, for instance.

Certainly, it behooves anyone using social media to be careful what goes up online, even behind a password-protected wall. The Internet aphorism is true: Don’t post anything you don’t want everyone to know, now and forever. HB 713 does not go too far; it protects only an obvious privacy right. Common sense and reasonable caution by users of social media must take care of the rest.